Notices. Request for comments and notice of public hearing

9,756 words·~44 min read·/register/2005/10/06/05-20089

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

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 35-28041] Filings Under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as Amended (“Act”) September 30, 2005. Notice is hereby given that the following filing(s) has/have been made with the Commission pursuant to provisions of the Act and rules promulgated under the Act. All interested persons are referred to the application(s) and/or declaration(s) for complete statements of the proposed transaction(s) summarized below.

The application(s) and/or declaration(s) and any amendment(s) is/are available for public inspection through the Commission's Branch of Public Reference. Interested persons wishing to comment or request a hearing on the application(s) and/or declaration(s) should submit their views in writing by October 21, 2005, to the Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington, DC 20549-0609, and serve a copy on the relevant applicant(s) and/or declarant(s) at the address(es) specified below.

Proof of service (by affidavit or, in the case of an attorney at law, by certificate) should be filed with the request. Any request for hearing should identify specifically the issues of facts or law that are disputed. A person who so requests will be notified of any hearing, if ordered, and will receive a copy of any notice or order issued in the matter. After October 21, 2005, the application(s) and/or declaration(s), as filed or as amended, may be granted and/or permitted to become effective.

Northeast Utilities, et al. (70-9755) Northeast Utilities (“NU”), a public utility holding company registered under the Act, Building 111-4, One Federal Street, Springfield, Massachusetts 01105; Yankee Energy System, Inc. (“YES”), a public utility holding company subsidiary of NU, exempt from registration under section 3(a)(1) of the Act by rule 2, and Northeast Utilities Service Company, NU's service company subsidiary, 107 Selden Street, Berlin, Connecticut 06037; NU's direct and indirect public utility subsidiaries, The Connecticut Light and Power Company (“CL&P”) and Yankee Gas Services Company (“Yankee Gas”), 107 Selden Street, Berlin, Connecticut 06037, Western Massachusetts Electric Company, Building 111-4, One Federal Street, Springfield, Massachusetts 01105 (“WMECO” and with CL&P and Yankee Gas, the “Utility Borrowers”), Public Service Company of New Hampshire, Energy Park, 780 North Commercial Street, Manchester, New Hampshire 03101 (“PSNH”), and Holyoke Water Power Company (“HWP”), 107 Selden Street, Berlin, Connecticut 06037; and NU's direct and indirect nonutility subsidiaries, Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, The Rocky River Realty Company, The Quinnehtuk Company, Properties, Inc., Yankee Energy Financial Services Company, Yankee Energy Services Company, NorConn Properties, Inc., NU Enterprises, Inc., Northeast Generation Company, Northeast Generation Services Company, E.

S. Boulos Company, Woods Electrical Company, Inc., Woods Network Services, Inc., Select Energy, Inc., Select Energy New York, Inc., and Mode 1 Communications, Inc., 107 Selden Street, Berlin, Connecticut 06037, and North Atlantic Energy Corporation, North Atlantic Energy Service Corporation (“NAESC”), Energy Park, 780 North Commercial Street, Manchester, New Hampshire, 03101; and Select Energy Services, Inc., 24 Prime Parkway, Natick, Massachusetts 01760 (all of the above named companies collectively the “Applicants”) have filed a post-effective amendment to an application/declaration (“Amendment”) under sections 6(a) and 7 of the Act.

Applicants state that by order dated June 30, 2004 (Holding Co. Act Release No. 27870) (“2004 Order”), the Commission granted authority for NU, YES and the Utility Borrowers to issue short-term debt securities, subject to certain conditions. NU was authorized to issue up to an aggregate of $450 million of short-term debt at any one time outstanding through June 30, 2007 (“Authorization Period”). The 2004 Order also authorized continued operation of the NU Money Pool through the Authorization Period, based, in part, on the commitment by NU, YES and the Utility Borrowers that, apart from the securities issued for the purpose of funding money pool operations, no securities would be issued under the authority obtained under the 2004 Order unless:

(i)The security to be issued, if rated, is rated investment grade;

(ii)all outstanding securities of the issuer that are rated are rated investment grade; and

(iii)all outstanding securities of NU and YES that are rated, are rated investment grade (“Investment Grade Conditions”). The 2004 Order also approved a Money Pool borrowing limit for HWP of $10 million. With this Amendment, the Applicants seek the following authorizations: to increase the amount of short-term debt that NU may incur through the Authorization Period from $450 million to $700 million; to delete the Investment Grade Conditions on issuance of certain securities by NU, YES and the Utility Borrowers; to add NAESC as a participant in the NU Money Pool; and to increase HWP's Money Pool limit from $10 million to $35 million. Applicants state that no further authorizations are being requested by the Amendment and all other terms and conditions in the 2004 Order will remain applicable. According to the Applicants, management believes that the increase is necessary at this time to continue to support the credit and liquidity requirements of its regulated and competitive businesses. The Applicants also state that NU needs the additional liquidity to meet possible near-term, temporary cash needs, such as cash payments to buy our or buy down certain wholesale contracts, associated with the holding company's previously announced exit from the wholesale competitive energy business. In addition, a number of Select Energy's energy contracts require, according to Applicants, the posting of additional collateral in the form of cash or letters of credit in the event NU's credit ratings were to decline and in increasing amounts dependent upon the severity of the decline. Were NU's unsecured ratings to decline to sub-investment grade, Select Energy states that it could, under its present contracts, be asked to provide, as of March 31, 2005, approximately $500 million of collateral or letters of credit to various unaffiliated counterparties and approximately $154 million to several independent system operators and unaffiliated local distribution companies, which, management states, NU would currently be able to provide. In addition, according to Applicants, Standard and Poor's credit rating agency, has imposed reporting requirements industry-wide for its new liquidity tests. Standard and Poor's liquidity tests demonstrate, according to Applicants, that NU needs additional credit capacity to support its businesses in the event of certain hypothetical adverse developments affecting credit ratings and forward prices of energy commodity products. According to the Applicants, the external short-term debt which NU is requesting authority to issue may take a variety of forms, including commercial paper and unsecured notes with banks or other institutional lenders under credit facilities that are generally available to borrowers with comparable credit ratings. All short-term debt issued by NU as a result of this Amendment will have maturities of less than one year from the date of issuance. NU states that it will not issue any secured debt. Commercial paper issued by NU may be issued manually or through The Depository Trust Company in the form of book entry notes in denominations of not less than $50,000 of varying maturities. This commercial paper would typically be sold to dealers at the discount rate prevailing at the date of issuance for commercial paper of comparable quality and maturities sold to commercial paper dealers generally. The Applicants expect that the dealers acquiring the commercial paper will reoffer it at a discount to corporate and institutional investors. The Applicants state that no commercial paper will be issued by NU unless the issuer believes that the effective cost to it will be equal to or less than the effective interest rate at which it could issue short-term notes in an amount at least equal to the principal amount of the commercial paper. The commercial paper will be publicly issued and sold without registration under the Securities Exchange Act of 1933 in reliance upon one or more applicable exemptions from registration under that Act. According to NU, the effective cost of money on the short-term debt will not exceed competitive market rates available at the time of issuance for securities having the same or reasonably similar terms and conditions issued by companies of comparable credit quality, provided that in no event will the effective cost of capital exceed 300 basis points over the comparable term London Interbank Offered Rate. Issuance expenses will not exceed 5% of the principal amount of the securities. NU states that specific terms of the short-term debt will be determined by NU at the time of issuance but that those terms will comply in all regards to the parameters of financings authorizations set forth in the Amendment. A copy of all new notes or loan agreements executed as a result of the authority requested will be filed under cover of the next quarterly report under rule 24. NU states that, subject to the NU Aggregate Short-term Debt Limit, NU intends to renew and extend outstanding short-term debt as it matures, to refund such short-term debt with other similar short-term debt, to repay such short-term debt or to increase the amount of their short-term debt from time to time through the Authorization Period. In a recent order issued by the Commission (Pepco Holdings, Inc., Holding Co. Act Release No. 27991, June 30, 2005), the Commission modified the investment grade conditions applicable to the issuance of securities by holding companies and their public utility subsidiaries, including the elimination of investment grade requirements for the issuance of short-term debt. Since the 2004 Order only authorized the issuance of short-term debt and interest rate hedges, the Applicants request that the Commission eliminate the Investment Grade Conditions set forth in the 2004 Order. According to the Applicants, HWP has embarked on a capital spending program which will require it, among other things, to install additional pollution control equipment at its Mt. Tom generating facility. This program, expected to cost approximately $17 million, plus contingencies and other requirements associated with ongoing remediation of site contamination at Mt. Tom, necessitates an increase in HWP's borrowing capacity. It has no external sources of funds at present and is close to its authorized Money Pool limit. The Money Pool represents an economic alternative for HWP's short-term funding needs. Applicants request an increase in HWP's Money Pool limit from $10 million to $35 million. NAESC, which seeks authority to participate in the NU Money Pool, formerly operated the Seabrook Nuclear Station, which was sold in 2002. NAESC currently retains cash against certain future obligations, and Applicants state that NU's cash management system will be enhanced by the addition of NAESC to the NU Money Pool on the terms and conditions set forth in the 2004 Order. NU states that at all times during the Authorization Period it will maintain common equity (as reflected in the most recent Form 10-K or Form 10-Q filed with the Commission) of at least 30% of its consolidated capitalization (net of securitization debt). The term “consolidated capitalization” is defined to include, where applicable, common stock equity (comprised of common stock, additional paid in capital, retained earnings, accumulated other comprehensive income or loss, and/or treasury stock), minority interest, preferred stock, preferred securities, equity linked securities, long-term debt, short-term debt and current maturities (net of securitization debt). NU states that, as of June 30, 2005, NU's consolidated capitalization (net of securitization debt) consisted of 38.6% common equity, 2.1% preferred stock, 59.3% long-term and short-term debt. When securitization debt (Rate Reduction Bonds) is included, NU's consolidated capitalization as of June 30, 2005, was 30.5% common equity, 1.7% preferred stock and 46.8% debt, 21.0% Rate Reduction Bonds. The proceeds from the issuance of short-term debt as requested in this Amendment will be used for

(i)general corporate purposes, including investments by and capital expenditures of NU and its subsidiaries, including, without limitation, the funding of future investments in exempt wholesale generators (“EWGs”), foreign utility companies (“FUCOs”) (each to the extent permitted under the Act or Commission order), energy-related companies (“Rule 58 Subsidiaries”) to the extent permitted under the Act or Commission order, and exempt telecommunications companies (“ETCs”),

(ii)the repayment, redemption, refunding or purchase by NU or any subsidiary of any of its own securities from non-affiliates under rule 42, and

(iii)financing working capital requirements of NU and its subsidiaries. For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, pursuant to delegated authority. Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-5475 Filed 10-5-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52533; File No. SR-Amex-2005-085] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Implementation of a Cancellation Fee for Equities and ETFs September 29, 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 September 20, 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 September 23, 2005, Amex filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 On September 26, 2005, Amex filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. 4 Amex has designated this proposal as one establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by Amex under 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 parties. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange:

(1)Clarified that cancellations resulting from “Immediate or Cancel” and “Fill or Kill” orders will not be counted when determining the amount of the cancellation fee to be charged to an executing clearing member and updated the corresponding proposed rule text; and

(2)stated that Amex plans to begin billing the cancellation fee in November 2005 based on order cancellations and executions occurring in October 2005. 4 In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange made technical corrections to the proposed rule text. The effective date of the original proposed rule change is September 20, 2005, the effective date of Amendment No. 1 is September 23, 2005, and the effective date of Amendment No. 2 is September 26, 2005. For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change under Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission considers the period to commence on September 23, 2005, the date on which Amex filed Amendment No. 1. See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). 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 Amex proposes to establish a fee based on the number of order cancellations in equities, Exchange Traded Fund Shares and Trust Issued Receipts (hereinafter referred to as “equities and ETFs”) routed through Amex systems. Below is the text of the proposed rule change, as amended. Proposed new language is *italicized* ; proposed deletions are in [brackets]. Amex Equity Fee Schedule *I.* Transaction Charges No change. II. Equities Order Cancellation Fee *The executing clearing member is charged $0.25 for every equities and ETF order sent for a mnemonic and cancelled through Amex systems in a given month when the total number of equities and ETF orders executed for that mnemonic is less than or equal to 10% of equities and ETF orders cancelled through Amex systems for that mnemonic in that same month. The fee does not apply to mnemonics for which fewer than 100,000 orders were cancelled through Amex systems and does not apply to the first 100,000 cancellations submitted for a mnemonic. In addition, cancellations resulting from “Immediate or Cancel” or “Fill or Kill” orders will not be counted towards the number of cancellations used to determine whether the fee should be applied to a mnemonic and will not be counted when determining the amount of the cancellation fee charged to an executing clearing member. Executions of “Immediate or Cancel” and “Fill or Kill” orders will however be counted towards the number of executions.* [II.] *III.* Regulatory Fee No change. Amex Exchange Traded Funds and Trust Issued Receipts Fee Schedule Exchange Traded Funds

(ETFs)include Portfolio Depositary Receipts, Index Fund Shares and Trust Issued Receipts. The fee imposed for executing trades in these securities will vary depending on for whom the trade is executed as follows: I. Transaction Charges for ETFs Without Unreimbursed Fees to a Third Party No change. II. Transaction Charges for ETFs for which the Exchange Pays Unreimbursed Fees to a Third Party No change. III. Transaction Charges for SPDR O-Strip No change. IV. Transaction Charges for iShares FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index Fund No change. Note *s* : No change. V. ETF Order Cancellation Fee *The executing clearing member is charged $0.25 for every equities and ETF order sent for a mnemonic and cancelled through Amex systems in a given month when the total number of equities and ETF orders executed for that mnemonic is less than or equal to 10% of equities and ETF orders cancelled through Amex systems for that mnemonic in that same month. The fee does not apply to mnemonics for which fewer than 100,000 orders were cancelled through Amex systems and does not apply to the first 100,000 cancellations submitted for a mnemonic. In addition, cancellations resulting from “Immediate or Cancel” or “Fill or Kill” orders will not be counted towards the number of cancellations used to determine whether the fee should be applied to a mnemonic and will not be counted when determining the amount of the cancellation fee charged to an executing clearing member. Executions of “Immediate or Cancel” and “Fill or Kill” orders will however be counted towards the number of executions.* [II.] *VI.* Regulatory Fee No charge. Note: 1. This exemption does not apply to System Orders of a member or member organization trading as agent for the account of a non-member competing market maker, who will be charged $.000075 × Total Value 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 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 proposes to establish a fee on the cancellation of orders in equities and ETFs. The Amex believes that this fee is necessary given the often disproportionate number of order cancellations received relative to order executions and the increased costs associated with the practice of immediately following an order routed through exchange systems with a cancel request for that order. These order cancellations utilize system capacity and may require manual processing by specialist unit personnel, which may unnecessarily distract specialist staff from other responsibilities. Cancellations often come in large numbers creating backlogs in Amex systems, increasing Exchange costs, adversely impacting public customers, their clearing firms and specialists and resulting in less than timely executions of customer orders. The large volume of order cancellations requires an increase in Exchange spending on systems and related hardware used to process increased message traffic. The cancellation fee for equities and ETFs is similar in structure to the options order cancellation fee adopted by the Exchange in 2001. 7 The fee will apply to the executing clearing member when the number of cancellations of equity and ETF orders exceeds certain parameters. The cancellation fee for equities and ETFs will be calculated and applied on a “mnemonic-by-mnemonic” basis for each clearing member. Mnemonics are reference numbers or codes used by executing clearing members to designate:

(1)Either the branch, trading desk or account from which orders, cancellations or other messages are sent to Amex; or

(2)the types of products for which orders, cancellations or other types of messages are sent to Amex. For example, some clearing firms use one mnemonic to send equity orders and cancellations and another mnemonic to send ETF orders and cancellations. Each executing clearing member has at least one mnemonic, while many executing clearing members have two or more. Calculating and applying the cancellation fee for equities and ETFs on a mnemonic-by-mnemonic basis provides a more precise way of billing executing clearing members. 7 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 45110 (November 27, 2001), 66 FR 63080 (December 4, 2001). Specifically, an executing clearing member will be charged $0.25 for every equities and ETF order sent for a mnemonic and cancelled through Amex systems in a given month when the total number of equities and ETF orders executed for that mnemonic is less than or equal to 10% of the equities and ETF orders cancelled through Amex systems for that mnemonic in that same month. The fee does not apply to mnemonics for which fewer than 100,000 orders were cancelled through Amex systems and does not apply to the first 100,000 cancellations submitted for a mnemonic. For example, in August 2005, an executing clearing member submitted, for one mnemonic, 313,511 orders in Amex equities. For that same mnemonic, the executing clearing member cancelled 286,556 of those orders and executed 26,955. Pursuant to the proposed cancellation fee, the executing clearing member would have been subject to a fee of $46,639 (286,556×100,000 × $0.25) for that mnemonic. Cancellations resulting from “Immediate or Cancel” or “Fill or Kill” orders 8 will not be counted towards the number of cancellations, since those order types, which combine an order with its cancellation in one message, do not add to the message traffic sent through Exchange systems. Cancellations resulting from “Immediate or Cancel” and “Fill or Kill” orders will not be counted when determining the amount of the cancellation fee charged to an executing clearing member. Executions of “Immediate or Cancel” and “Fill or Kill” orders will, however, be counted towards the number of executions. 9 8 A “Fill or Kill” order is a market or limited price order which is to be executed in its entirety as soon as it is represented in the trading crowd, and such order, if not so executed, is to be treated as cancelled. An “Immediate or Cancel” order is a market or limited price order which is to be executed in whole or in part as soon as such order is represented in the trading crowd, and the portion not so executed, is to be treated as cancelled. See Amex Rules 131(i) and (k). 9 See Amendment No. 1, *supra* note 3. Amex plans to begin billing the cancellation fee in November 2005 based on order cancellations and executions occurring in October 2005. 10 10 *Id.* 2. Statutory Basis Amex believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 11 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 12 in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. In particular, Amex believes that the proposed cancellation fee will allow the Exchange to more equitably recover systems capacity costs from its members. 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 12 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, as amended, will impose any burden on competition. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others No written comments were 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 has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 13 and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder 14 since it establishes or changes a due, fee or other charge imposed by the Exchange. 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 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. 15 15 *See supra* note 4. 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-2005-085 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-Amex-2005-085. 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 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-2005-085 and should be submitted on or before October 27, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 16 16 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-5469 Filed 10-5-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52532; File No. SR-CBOE-2005-75] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to Remote Market-Maker Transaction Fees September 29, 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 September 9, 2005, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared by the Exchange. On September 26, 2005, the CBOE submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The CBOE has filed the proposed rule change as one establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the CBOE under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 4 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 5 which renders the proposal, as amended, 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 In Amendment No. 1, CBOE revised the purpose section of the proposed rule change to clarify the rationale for the distinction between the transaction fee for on-floor market-makers and remote market-makers. 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 5 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2) I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The CBOE proposes to amend its Fees Schedule to establish a Remote Market-Maker transaction fee for index options, options on exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”) and options on Holding Company Depositary Receipts (“HOLDRs”). Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new language is *italicized;* proposed deletions are in [brackets]. Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc.; Fees Schedule September [1] *9* , 2005 1. Options Transaction Fees (1)(3)(4)(7)(16): Per Contract Equity Options (13): I.-IX. Unchanged. QQQQ and SPDR Options: I.-VII. Unchanged. Index Options (includes Dow Jones DIAMONDS, OEF and other ETF and HOLDRs options): I.-VIII. Unchanged. IX. Remote Market-Maker—$.26 2. Marketing Fee (6)(16): Unchanged. 3. Floor Brokerage Fee (1)(5)(16): Unchanged. 4. RAES Access Fee (Retail Automatic Execution System) (1)(4)(16): Unchanged. Footnotes: (1)-(16) Unchanged. Remainder of Fee Schedule-Unchanged. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the CBOE included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change, as amended, and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change, as amended. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The CBOE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose In April 2005, the Exchange established a transaction fee for Remote-Market-Makers (“RMMs”) in equity, QQQQ and SPDR options at $.26 per contract. 6 An RMM is an individual member or member organization registered with the Exchange that makes transactions as a dealer-specialist from a location other than the physical trading station for the subject option class. 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51746 (May 26, 2005), 70 FR 32855 (June 6, 2005). The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule to establish a $.26 per contract RMM transaction fee for index options, options on ETFs (all other options on ETFs traded on the Exchange besides QQQQ and SPDR options) and options on HOLDRs. The proposed fee will apply to RMM transactions in any index, ETF and HOLDRs options class that the Exchange determines to add to its Hybrid 2.0 trading platform. The Exchange believes the proposed RMM transaction fee is appropriately set higher than those of on-floor market-makers because the Exchange will incur additional systems and other logistical costs both initially and on an ongoing basis in order to establish and maintain the infrastructure needed to enable market participation as an RMM. 2. Statutory Basis The CBOE believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 7 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) 8 of the Act in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change, as amended, will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change, as amended, establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charged imposed by the Exchange, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3) of the Act 9 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 10 thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change the Commission may summarily abrogate such proposed 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. 11 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 10 17 CFR 19b-4(f)(2). 11 The effective date of the original proposed rule change is September 9, 2005, and the effective date of Amendment No. 1 is September 26, 2005. For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposal, the Commission considers the period to commence on September 26, 2005, the date on which the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include SR-CBOE-2005-75 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 SR-CBOE-2005-75. 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 the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to SR-CBOE-2005-75 and should be submitted on or before October 27, 2005. 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-5470 Filed 10-5-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52534; File No. SR-CHX-2004-25] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change and Amendment Nos. 1, 2, and 3 Thereto and Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to Amendment No. 4 Thereto Relating to a Prohibition on Using a Layoff Service Unless the Service Provides Required Information to the Exchange September 29, 2005. I. Introduction On August 31, 2004, the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (“CHX” 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 CHX Article V, Rule 4 to prohibit CHX participants from using any communications means to send orders to another market for execution (a “layoff service”), unless the layoff service has established a process for providing the Exchange with specific information about the orders and the executions that participants receive. On June 7, 2005 and June 27, 2005, the Exchange filed Amendment Nos. 1 3 and 2 4 to the proposed rule change, respectively. The proposed rule change, as amended by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on July 12, 2005. 5 The Commission received no comments on the proposal, as amended by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2. On August 12, 2005, the CHX filed Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change. 6 Amendment No. 3 was published for notice and comment in the **Federal Register** on August 18, 2005. 7 The Commission received no comments on Amendment No. 3. On September 23, 2005, the CHX filed Amendment No. 4 to the proposed rule change. 8 This order approves the proposed rule change, as amended by Amendment Nos. 1, 2, and 3; grants accelerated approval to Amendment No. 4 of the proposed rule change; and solicits comments from interested persons on Amendment No. 4. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Amendment No. 1 dated June 7, 2005. In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange, among other things, added a requirement for participants to provide additional information about their layoff activity; replaced references to the Exchange's “members” with references to its “participants” to reflect changes in terminology associated with the Exchange's February 2005 demutualization; required that participants notify the Exchange before using an alternative or additional layoff vendor; and confirmed that these rules would not replace any record retention obligations to which the Exchange's participants would be subject under the Act and the rules thereunder. 4 *See* Amendment No. 2 dated June 27, 2005, replacing the original filing and Amendment No. 1 in their entirety. In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange eliminated the requirement to provide information about the contra party to the execution and made other technical changes to the proposal. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51967 (July 1, 2005), 70 FR 40086. 6 *See* Amendment No. 3 dated August 12, 2005. In Amendment No. 3, which supplemented the proposal as noticed, the CHX modified the proposed rule text to eliminate the reference to an August 1, 2005 effective date and instead provided for an effective date of September 30, 2005. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52248 (August 12, 2005), 70 FR 48610. 8 *See* Amendment No. 4 dated September 23, 2005. In Amendment No. 4, the Exchange amended the proposed rule to include a new effective date of October 31, 2005 for NASDAQ/NM securities in order to allow its participants and their layoff vendors additional time to implement system changes to comply with the proposed rule change. The effective date for Dual Trading System issues would remain at September 30, 2005. The Commission notes that under the Exchange's rules, Dual Trading System securities are securities listed on the New York Stock Exchange, Inc., the American Stock Exchange, Inc., or on markets other than the Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. that are also listed or traded on the CHX. II. Description of the Proposal The Exchange's proposal, which would amend the Exchange's rule relating to communications from the trading floor, is designed to provide the Exchange with the layoff service information that it needs to enhance its surveillance programs. Specifically, the proposal would prohibit Exchange participants, beginning on September 30, 2005 for Dual Trading System issues 9 and October 31, 2005 for NASDAQ/NM securities, 10 from using a layoff service to send orders to another market for execution, unless that service (or the participant using the service) has established a process for providing the Exchange with the following specific information:

(1)The symbol of the security to be traded;

(2)the clearing organization;

(3)an order identifier that uniquely identifies the order;

(4)the participant recording the order details;

(5)the number of shares;

(6)the side of the market on which the order is placed;

(7)a designation of the order type ( *e.g.* , market, limit, stop, stop limit);

(8)whether the order is for the account of a customer or for the account of the participant sending the order;

(9)whether the order is short or short exempt;

(10)any limit price and/or stop price;

(11)the date and time of order transmission;

(12)the market to which the order was transmitted;

(13)the time in force;

(14)a designation of the order as held or not held;

(15)any special conditions or instructions associated with the order (including any customer do-not-display instructions or all-or-none conditions);

(16)any modifications to the details set out in

(1)through

(15)for all or part of an order or any cancellation of all or part of the order;

(17)the date and time of the transmission of any modifications to the order or any cancellation of the order;

(18)the date and time of any order expiration;

(19)the identification of the party canceling or modifying the order;

(20)the transaction price;

(21)the number of shares executed;

(22)the date and time of execution;

(23)settlement instructions;

(24)a system-generated time(s) of recording the required information; and

(25)any other information that the Exchange may require from time to time. 11 For purposes of this proposal, an “order” would be defined as any written, oral or electronic instruction to effect a transaction. 12 9 *See* Amendment No. 3, *supra* note 6. 10 *See* Amendment No. 4, *supra* note 8. 11 *See* proposed CHX Article V, Rule 4, Interpretation and Policy .01. 12 *See* proposed CHX Article V, Rule 4, Interpretation and Policy .03. Other provisions of the proposal set out additional requirements that are designed to ensure that the Exchange receives uniformly-presented, useful data. For example, the Exchange proposes that all information be provided on a real-time basis and in an electronic format acceptable to the Exchange. 13 In addition, each layoff service would be required to synchronize its business clocks and maintain that synchronization, with all time references expressed in terms of hours, minutes, and seconds. 14 13 *See* proposed CHX Article V, Rule 4, Interpretation and Policy .01. 14 *See* proposed CHX Article V, Rule 4, Interpretation and Policy .02 and .03. In addition, the proposal provides that a violation of the proposed new requirements would be considered conduct inconsistent with just and equitable principles of trade, in violation of CHX Article VIII, Rule 7. 15 Therefore, these violations would not be eligible for handling under the Exchange's Minor Rule Violation Plan. The Exchange would also prohibit a participant from using an alternative or additional layoff vendor, unless it has notified the Exchange of the change. 16 The Exchange confirms in its rule that the provisions in proposed CHX Article V, Rule 4 would not replace any record retention obligations to which the Exchange's participants could be subject under the Act and rules thereunder. 17 Finally, as an administrative matter, the Exchange also proposes to delete CHX Article V, Rule 5, which applied to wires from the Exchange's floor to its branch offices, since the Exchange represents that it no longer maintains branch offices and has no purpose for keeping this rule in place. 15 *See* proposed CHX Article V, Rule 4, Interpretation and Policy .04. 16 *See* proposed CHX Article V, Rule 4, Interpretation and Policy .05. 17 *See* proposed CHX Article V, Rule 4, Interpretation and Policy .06. III. Discussion and Commission Findings The Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 18 In particular, the Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 19 which requires 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. 18 In approving this proposed rule change, as amended, the Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 19 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The Exchange typically obtains information about off-floor activity of its participants from the Regional Exchange Data Summary (“REDS”) data provided by the Securities Industry Automation Corporation. However, according to the Exchange, the REDS data did not attribute layoff activity to the particular CHX member who transmitted a layoff order. Instead, Exchange market regulation analysts had to manually review the Exchange's exception reports and other trading records in order to conduct surveillance specific to individual CHX participants. 20 CHX has stated that the recording of layoff order information directly from the systems providers will eliminate this manual step, and that the proposal will provide it with necessary layoff service information to enhance its surveillance system. 20 *See* Letter from David C. Whitcomb, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Regulatory Officer, CHX, to Sharon Lawson, Senior Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, dated March 16, 2005 (discussing, in general, how the Exchange plans to utilize the data to be gathered pursuant to the proposed rule change). The Exchange's proposed rule change is intended to address recommendations made in the Exchange's 2003 settlement agreement with the Commission. 21 In the settlement agreement, the Commission cited the Exchange's failure “to detect and prevent a large number of trading rule violations, in part, because [the Exchange] did not have adequate surveillance systems to detect possible violations.” 22 In addition, the Commission found that the CHX had “relied on ineffective and often flawed manual processes to detect violations.” 23 The Commission believes that the Exchange's proposed obligations on its participants to use only layoff services that can provide specific, designated order information to the CHX is consistent with the recommendations made in the Exchange's settlement agreement with the Commission. 21 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 48566 (September 30, 2003) (Administrative Proceeding File No. 3-11282), available at: *http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/34-48566.htm.* 22 *Id.* 23 *Id.* Specifically, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, will provide the Exchange with a more automated process for receiving a comprehensive set of audit trail data on CHX participants' trading activity conducted through layoff systems. 24 The proposal will permit the Exchange to more efficiently collect information on the off-floor activity of CHX participants, thereby allowing the Exchange to integrate the audit trail data into its surveillance systems. Increased automation with respect to the receipt of layoff order details will, in turn, allow the Exchange to perform more automated surveillance and generate better surveillance reports. 24 The Exchange represents that layoff systems are private order routing networks which provide connectivity and order management functionality for orders sent to the primary exchanges in the listed markets. *See supra* note 20. In addition, the Commission believes that the proposal will improve the Exchange's ability to review its members' order-handling activities and to determine their compliance with applicable trading rules. For example, the Exchange's receipt of layoff vendor data will enhance the Exchange's review of specialists' compliance with the limit order display rule, 25 short sale position marking and tick text requirements, 26 best execution, 27 and trading ahead prohibitions. 28 25 *See* 17 CFR 240.11Ac1-4 and CHX Article XX, Rule 7.05. 26 *See* 17 CFR 240.10a-1. 27 *See* CHX Article XX, Rule 37. 28 *See* CHX Article XXX, Rules 2 and 3. Based on the above, the Commission finds the Exchange's efforts, through the proposed rule change, to enhance its surveillance of these areas with respect to layoff orders to be consistent with recommendations made in the Exchange's settlement agreement with the Commission. 29 Further, the Commission finds that the Exchange's proposal to enhance surveillance for compliance with CHX's rules, the Act and the rules thereunder is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 30 which requires that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 31 The Commission emphasizes that the detailed information required to be obtained relating to the layoff service will not replace any record retention obligations already required of CHX participants under the Act and the rules thereunder. 29 *See* supra note 21. 30 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 31 As an additional matter, the Commission believes that the proposal to delete CHX Article V, Rule 5 that applied to wires from the Exchange's floor to its branch offices is reasonable since the Exchange represents that it no longer maintains branch offices. In summary, the Commission believes that approving the proposal will help to strengthen the Exchange's surveillance program by providing the Exchange with data necessary to appropriately conduct more thorough and efficient surveillance of its participants' trading activities. 32 32 In a related proposed rule change, the Exchange proposes to amend its rules to require its on-floor participants to maintain specific details about orders originating on or off the floor of the Exchange for execution on the Exchange, as well as orders issued from the floor of the Exchange to any other market or trading venue. *See* SR-CHX-2004-38, available at: *http://www.chx.com/rules/proposed_rules.htm.* Accelerated Approval of Amendment No. 4 The Commission finds good cause for approving Amendment No. 4 to the proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after the amendment is published for comment in the **Federal Register** pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act. 33 Amendment No. 4 revises the proposed implementation date of the proposed rule change to October 31, 2005 for NASDAQ/NM securities, and maintains the implementation date for Dual Trading System issues at September 30, 2005. The Commission believes that the proposed extension of the compliance date for NASDAQ/NM securities to October 31, 2005 is reasonable in order to allow CHX participants and their layoff vendors additional time to implement system changes to comply with the proposal, while, at the same time, allows the Exchange to implement the proposal immediately, as of September 30, 2005, for Dual Trading System issues without further delay. Accordingly, the Commission believes that accelerated approval of Amendment No. 4 is appropriate. 33 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether Amendment No. 4 to the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-CHX-2004-25 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-CHX-2004-25. 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 Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CHX-2004-25 and should be submitted on or before October 27, 2005. V. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, 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. *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 34 that the proposed rule change (SR-CHX-2004-25) and Amendment Nos. 1, 2, and 3 thereto are approved, and that Amendment No. 4 thereto is hereby approved on an accelerated basis. 34 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 35 35 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-5468 Filed 10-5-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE Generalized System of Preferences (GSP): Request For Public Comments AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Request for comments and notice of public hearing. SUMMARY: Legislation authorizing the Generalized System of Preferences

(GSP)program expires on December 31, 2006. As Congress considers re-authorization of the program, the Trade Policy Staff Committee

(TPSC)is reviewing whether the Administration's operation of the program should be changed so that benefits are not focused on trade from a few countries and developing countries that traditionally have not been major traders under the program receive benefits. The TPSC will conduct a public hearing and is requesting public comment on this subject. DATES: The schedule for the public hearing and solicitation of public comments follows: October 21, 2005: Deadline for requests to appear at the Trade Policy Staff Committee Public Hearing and deadline for written pre-hearing brief or statement. Request to include name, address, telephone, fax, e-mail address, and witness's organization, if any. November 3, 2005: Public Hearing: Rooms 1 and 2, 1724 F Street, NW., Washington, DC (If necessary, the hearing will continue on the next day.) November 14, 2005: Deadline for submission of written public comments and post-hearing and rebuttal briefs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The TPSC is seeking written comments and testimony at a public hearing on the following issues:

(1)Whether operation of the GSP program should be modified so that beneficiaries that have not previously been major traders under the program increase their participation, which will assist them in using trade to promote their economic development; and

(2)Whether some beneficiaries are sufficiently competitive with respect to trade in eligible products and have expanded exports to the extent that they should no longer be designated as GSP beneficiaries. The TPSC is also seeking comments on the period for which the Congress should reauthorize the GSP program. Note: the TPSC is not seeking information of the type provided in connection with its annual review of product coverage and competitive need limits under the GSP program. In 2004, the top ten GSP beneficiary developing countries by trade volume (not including trade in petroleum products) were India, Brazil, Thailand, Indonesia, Turkey, Philippines, South Africa, Venezuela, Argentina, and Russia. Notice of Public Hearing The TPSC will hold a hearing on November 3, 2005, beginning at 10 a.m., in Rooms 1 and 2, 1724 F Street NW., Washington, DC. If necessary, the hearing will continue on the next day. The hearing will be open to the public and a transcript of the hearing will be made available for public inspection or can be purchased from the reporting company. No electronic media coverage will be allowed. Each interested party wishing to make an oral presentation at the hearing must submit, following the “Requirements for Submissions” below, the name, address, telephone number, facsimile number, and e-mail address, if available, of the witness(es) representing the party to Marideth Sandler, Executive Director of the GSP Program and Chairman of the TPSC GSP Subcommittee, by 5 p.m., October 21, 2005. Requests to present oral testimony in connection with the public hearing must be accompanied by a written brief or statement, in English, and also must be received by 5 p.m., October 21, 2005. Oral testimony before the GSP Subcommittee of the TPSC will be limited to five-minute presentations that summarize or supplement information contained in briefs or statements submitted for the record. Post-hearing briefs or statements will be accepted if they conform with the regulations cited below and are submitted, in English, by 5 p.m., November 14, 2005. Parties not wishing to appear at the public hearing may submit post-hearing written briefs or statements, in English, by 5 p.m., November 14, 2005. Requirements for Submission In order to facilitate prompt processing of submissions, USTR strongly urges and prefers electronic e-mail submissions only in response to this notice. Hand-delivered submissions will not be accepted. These submissions should be single-copy transmissions in English with the total submission not to exceed 20 single-spaced standard letter-size pages. E-mail submissions should use the following subject line: “2005 GSP Review” and, as appropriate “Notice of Intent to Testify” or Written Comments.” Documents must be submitted in English in one of the following formats: MSWord (.DOC), WordPerfect (.WPD), or text (.TXT) files. Documents may not be submitted as electronic image files or contain imbedded images (for example, “.JPG,” “.TIF,” “.PDF,” “.BMP,” or “.GIF”). Supporting documentation submitted as spreadsheets are acceptable as Excel files, formatted for printing on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper. To the extent possible, any data attachments to the submission should be included in the same file as the submission itself, and not as separate files. If the submission contains business confidential information, a non-confidential version of the submission must also be submitted that indicates where confidential information was redacted by inserting asterisks where material was deleted. In addition, the confidential submission must be clearly marked “BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL” at the top and bottom of each page of the document. The non-confidential version must also be clearly marked at the top and bottom of each page (either “PUBLIC VERSION” or “NON-CONFIDENTIAL”). Documents that are submitted without any marking will be considered public documents. For any document containing business confidential information submitted as an electronic attached file to an e-mail transmission, the file name of the business confidential version should begin with the characters “BC-”, and the file name of the public version should begin with the characters “P-”. The “P-” or “BC-” should be followed by the name of the party (government, company, union, association, etc.) making the submission. E-mail submissions should not include separate cover letters or messages in the message area of the e-mail; information that might appear in any cover letter should be included directly in the attached file containing the submission itself, including the sender's e-mail address and other identifying information. The e-mail address for these submissions is *FR0052@USTR.EOP.GOV.* Documents not submitted in accordance with these instructions might not be considered in this review. If unable to provide submissions by e-mail, please contact the GSP Subcommittee to arrange for an alternative method of transmission. Public versions of all documents relating to this review will be available for review approximately two weeks after the relevant due date by appointment in the USTR public reading room, 1724 F Street NW., Washington, DC. Appointments may be made from 9:30 a.m. to noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, by calling

(202)395-6186. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For procedural questions concerning written comments or participation in the public hearing, contact Regina Teeter,

(202)395-9681. All other questions should be directed to Marideth Sandler, Executive Director of the GSP Program, Office of the United States Trade Representative, 1724 F Street, NW., Room F-220, Washington, DC 20508,

(202)395-6971. Carmen Suro-Bredie, Chairman, Trade Policy Staff Committee. [FR Doc. 05-20089 Filed 10-5-05; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 5

Traces to 5 documents

U.S. Code

CFR