58208 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2004 / Notices 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

3See letter from Kathleen M. Boege, Vice 

President & Associate General Counsel, CHX, to 

Nancy J. Sanow, Assistant Director, Division of 

Market Regulation (‘‘Division’’), Commission, dated 

March 10, 2004 (‘‘Amendment No. 1’’). Amendment 

No. 1 clarified the purpose and effects of the 

proposal.

4See letter from Kathleen M. Boege, Vice 

President & Associate General Counsel, CHX, to 

Nancy J. Sanow, Assistant Director, Division, 

Commission, dated September 13, 2004 

(‘‘Amendment No. 2’’). Amendment No. 2 replaced 

the original proposal and Amendment No. 1 in their 

entirety.

hearing. The petitioner must also 

provide references to those specific 

sources and documents of which the 

petitioner is aware and on which the 

petitioner intends to rely to establish 

those facts or expert opinion. The 

petition must include sufficient 

information to show that a genuine 

dispute exists with the applicant on a 

material issue of law or fact. 

Contentions shall be limited to matters 

within the scope of the amendment 

under consideration. The contention 

must be one which, if proven, would 

entitle the petitioner/requestor to relief. 

A petitioner/requestor who fails to 

satisfy these requirements with respect 

to at least one contention will not be 

permitted to participate as a party. 

Those permitted to intervene become 

parties to the proceeding, subject to any 

limitations in the order granting leave to 

intervene, and have the opportunity to 

participate fully in the conduct of the 

hearing. 

Nontimely requests and/or petitions 

and contentions will not be entertained 

absent a determination by the 

Commission or the presiding officer of 

the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

that the petition, request and/or the 

contentions should be granted based on 

a balancing of the factors specified in 10 

CFR 2.309(a)(1)(i)–(viii).

A request for a hearing or a petition 

for leave to intervene must be filed by: 

(1) First class mail addressed to the 

Office of the Secretary of the 

Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001, Attention: Rulemaking and 

Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express 

mail, and expedited delivery services: 

Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, 

One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, 

Attention: Rulemaking and 

Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail 

addressed to the Office of the Secretary, 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV; or (4) 

facsimile transmission addressed to the 

Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC, Attention: Rulemakings and 

Adjudications Staff at (301) 415–1101, 

verification number is (301) 415–1966. 

A copy of the request for hearing and 

petition for leave to intervene should 

also be sent to the Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001, and it is requested that copies be 

transmitted either by means of facsimile 

transmission to (301) 415–3725 or by email to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy 

of the request for hearing and petition 

for leave to intervene should also be 

sent David W. Jenkins, Esq., 500 Circle 

Drive, Buchanan, MI 49107, attorney for 

the licensee. 

For further details with respect to this 

action, see the licensee’s application for 

amendment dated April 6, 2004, and the 

Cook ITS Conversion Web page (as 

discussed above). Documents may be 

examined, and/or copied for a fee at the 

Commission’s PDR, located at One 

White Flint North, Public File Area O1 

F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (First Floor), 

Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 

records will be accessible electronically 

from the Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System’s 

(ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading 

Room on the Internet at the NRC Web 

site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/

adams.html. Persons who do not have 

access to ADAMS or who encounter 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS, should contact the 

NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone 

at 1–800–397–4209, (301) 415–4737, or 

by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day 

of September, 2004. 

Jack Donohew, 

Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project 

Directorate IV, Division of Licensing Project 

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 04–21765 Filed 9–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–50417; File No. SR–CHX–

2003–07] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice 

of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change 

and Amendments No. 1 and 2 Thereto 

by the Chicago Stock Exchange, 

Incorporated Relating to Out-of-Range 

Execution Rules 

September 21, 2004. 

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 March 20, 

2003, the Chicago Stock Exchange, 

Incorporated (‘‘CHX’’ 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 March 10, 2004, the Exchange filed 

Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule 

change,3 and on September 15, 2004, 

the Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to 

the proposed rule change.4 The 

Commission is publishing this notice to 

solicit comments on the proposed rule 

change, as amended, from interested 

persons.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to amend 

CHX Article XX, Rule 37, which 

governs, among other things, ‘‘out-ofrange’’ executions. The text of the 

proposed rule change, as amended, 

appears below. Additions appear in 

italics; deletions are in [brackets].

* * * * *

Chicago Stock Exchange Rules 

ARTICLE XX 

Guaranteed Execution System and 

Midwest Automated Execution System 

RULE 37. (a)Guaranteed Executions.

* * * * *

[6. Executions Outside of Range. 

Since executions are guaranteed on the 

basis of the size and price of the best bid 

or offering, the order may be executed 

out of the primary market range for the 

day but in a Dual Trading System issue 

a stop must be granted if requested.] 

[7.]6. No change to text.

* * * * *

(b) Automated Executions.

* * * * *

(9) [All market orders received 

through the MAX System that would 

result in an out of range execution shall 

be deemed to be received with a request 

to STOP. Additionally, specialists may 

stop limit orders that are marketable 

when entered into the MAX System. 

Subject to Interpretations and Policies 

.03 under this Rule 37, a specialist may 

execute a stopped order out of the 

primary market range, at no worse than 

the stopped price, provided the 

specialist receives approval to do so 

from two floor officials.]

* * * * *

(d) SuperMAX 2000. 

SuperMAX 2000 shall be a voluntary 

automatic execution program within the 

MAX System. SuperMAX 2000 shall be 

available for any security trading on the 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2004 / Notices 58209

5An ‘‘out-of-range’’ execution is an execution that 

would create a new high or new low for the day 

when compared to the primary market range.

6See CHX Article XX, Rule 37(b)(9).

7 Inadvertent violations of the current rule also 

require specialists to correct improper executions, 

which can be an inconvenience to the Exchange’s 

order-sending firms who must send additional 

execution confirmations to their customers.

8 Deletion of the out-of-range provisions relating 

to the stopping of otherwise out-of-range orders 

may impact CHX Article XX, Rule 28, which deals 

with a CHX specialist’s liability for stopped orders. 

The Exchange, based on discussions with the 

Commission, agrees that it is appropriate to clarify 

whether the practice of stopping stock should be 

permitted on the Exchange. If the Exchange’s 

management, member committees and Board of 

Governors determines that this practice should be 

prohibited, the Exchange will effect such a rule 

change, including deletion of CHX Article XX, Rule 

28, by means of a separate submission to the 

Commission. If the Exchange determines that it 

remains appropriate for CHX specialists to stop 

stock in certain limited circumstances, then the 

Exchange will submit a rule change to the 

Commission that would specifically define the 

circumstances under which stock may be stopped 

on the CHX, and specifically outlining appropriate 

CHX specialist conduct under such circumstances.

9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

Exchange in decimal price increments. 

A specialist may choose to enable this 

voluntary program within the MAX 

System on an issue-by-issue basis.

* * * * *

[(5) Out of Range. Notwithstanding 

anything herein to the contrary, 

SuperMAX 2000 will not automatically 

execute an order if such execution 

would result in an out of range 

execution.]

* * * * *

. . . Interpretations and Policies 

.01 No change to text. 

.02 No change to text. 

.03 Reserved for future use. [With regard 

to paragraph 6 of paragraph (a) of this 

Rule, in the case of a minimum 

variation market, a stopped sell order 

will not be filled until a transaction 

takes place at the bid price or lower on 

the primary exchange or the Exchange’s 

displayed share volume at the offering 

has been exhausted. A stopped buy 

order will not be filled until a 

transaction takes place at the offering 

price or higher on the primary exchange 

or the Exchange’s displayed share 

volume at the bid has been exhausted. 

Notwithstanding the foregoing, all 

orders stopped pursuant to this 

Interpretation and Policy .03 shall be 

executed by the end of the trading day 

on which such order was stopped at no 

worse than the stopped price.]

* * * * *

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 

CHX included statements concerning 

the purpose of and basis for the 

proposed rule change, and discussed 

any comments it received regarding the 

proposal. The text of these statements 

may be examined at the places specified 

in Item IV below. The CHX 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 amend 

CHX Article XX, Rule 37, which 

governs, among other things, ‘‘out-ofrange’’ executions. The Exchange’s rules 

currently impose specific order 

handling requirements on specialists 

when the execution of an order would 

result in an out-of-range execution.5 For 

example, Exchange rules require that 

market orders received through MAX, 

the Exchange’s automated routing and 

execution system that would result in 

an out-of-range execution are deemed 

received with a request to stop.6 Under 

existing rules, a specialist may execute 

a stopped order out of the primary 

market range only with the approval of 

two floor officials.

This out-of-range rule likely was put 

in place at the request of customers, or 

as a marketing tool to attract new 

customers, when trading occurred in 

much larger minimum variations and 

when trading on regional exchanges was 

somewhat less common. Today, trading 

on regional exchanges is not a new 

phenomenon. Moreover, trading on all 

markets now occurs in a decimal trading 

environment, where an out-of-range 

execution based on the national best bid 

or offer is more readily seen by 

customers as accurately and 

appropriately reflecting the current 

market for the security. In addition, the 

existing rule can have the unintended—

and in today’s sometimes fast-paced 

trading environment—inappropriate 

result of delaying order executions 

when the specialist has stopped the 

order waiting for an opportunity to fill 

it within the primary market range.7 For 

all of these reasons, the Exchange 

believes that it is no longer necessary to 

require that its specialists only fill 

orders within the primary market range 

for the day.

The proposed rule text would 

eliminate all references to specific 

order-handling responsibilities with 

respect to out-of-range executions.8

Once the out-of-range functionality is 

eliminated from the Exchange’s systems, 

an order that is eligible for automatic 

execution will be automatically 

executed by the Exchange’s MAX 

system, even if it will constitute an outof-range execution.

2. Statutory Basis 

The CHX believes that the proposed 

rule change, as amended, is consistent 

with Section 6(b) of the Act,9 in general, 

and furthers the objectives of Section 

6(b)(5) of the Act,10 in particular, in that 

it is 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.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of Burden on Competition 

The Exchange believes that no burden 

will be placed on competition as a result 

of the proposed rule change. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments Regarding the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants or Others 

No written comments were either 

solicited or received. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

Within 35 days of the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register or within such longer period (i) 

as the Commission may designate up to 

90 days of such date if its finds such 

longer period to be appropriate and 

publishes its reasons for so finding or 

(ii) as to which the Exchange consents, 

the Commission will: 

A. By order approve such proposed 

rule change, or 

B. Institute proceedings to determine 

whether the proposed rule change 

should be disapproved. 

IV. Solicitation of Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written data, views and 

arguments concerning the foregoing, 

including whether the proposed rule 

change, 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 

58210 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2004 / Notices 

11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50191 

(August 13, 2004), 69 FR 51504.

4The term ‘‘Non-OTP Holder Market Maker’’

includes, but is not limited to, specialists, 

designated primary market makers, lead market 

makers, market makers, registered options traders, 

primary market makers and competitive market 

makers registered on an exchange other than the 

PCX. See PCX Rule 6.1(b)(35).

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).

8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

9 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

• Send e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File 

No. SR–CHX–2003–07 on the subject 

line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20549–0609. 

All submissions should refer to File 

No. SR–CHX–2003–07. 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, 450 Fifth Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of 

such filing will also be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of the CHX. 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–CHX–2003–

07 and should be submitted on or before 

October 20, 2004.

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated 

authority.11

Margaret H. McFarland, 

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 04–21839 Filed 9–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–50430; File No. SR–PCX–

2004–78] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific 

Exchange, Inc.; Order Approving a 

Proposed Rule Change Relating to 

Priority and Order Allocation 

Procedures for PCX Plus 

September 23, 2004. 

On August 10, 2004, the Pacific 

Exchange, Inc. (‘‘PCX’’) 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 PCX Rule 6.76 (Priority and 

Allocation Procedures of PCX Plus) to 

eliminate the requirement that inbound 

marketable Broker Dealer orders route to 

Floor Broker Hand Held Terminals in 

some trading scenarios in lieu of 

receiving immediate electronic 

executions and to eliminate Electronic 

Book Execution pursuant to PCX Rule 

6.76(b)(4). The proposed rule change 

was published for comment in the 

Federal Register on August 19, 2004.3

The Commission received no comments 

on the proposal.

The Exchange proposes to amend PCX 

Rule 6.76 to allow Firm and Non-OTP 

Holder Market Maker 4 orders to 

immediately execute on PCX Plus. The 

PCX also proposes to remove the 

restrictions on an order entered by a 

Firm or Non-OTP Holder or OTP Firm 

Market Maker less than one minute 

before the inbound order. In addition, 

the Exchange proposes to eliminate the 

40% participation limitation currently 

placed on a Firm, Non-OTP Holder or 

OTP Firm Market Maker for an inbound 

order that is not entirely filled. Finally, 

the PCX proposes to eliminate the 

Electronic Book Execution rules set 

forth in PCX Rule 6.76(b)(4) that prevent 

PCX Market Makers from immediately 

executing orders against the 

Consolidated Book.

After careful review, the Commission 

finds that the proposed rule change is 

consistent with the requirements of the 

Act and the rules and regulations 

thereunder applicable to a national 

securities exchange 5 and, in particular, 

the requirements of section 6(b) of the 

Act 6 and the rules and regulations 

thereunder. The Commission finds that 

the proposed rule change is consistent 

with section 6(b)(5) of the Act,7 which 

requires that the rules of an exchange be 

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 a national market 

system, and, in general, to protect 

investors and the public interest.

Specifically, the Commission finds 

that, in eliminating restrictions which 

prevent Firm and Non-OTP Market 

Maker orders from immediately 

executing, the proposed rule changes 

should provide greater efficiencies in 

the marketplace. In particular, the 

Commission believes that allowing PCX 

Market Makers to immediately execute 

against the Consolidated Book by 

eliminating the Electronic Book 

Execution rules of PCX Rule 6.76.(b)(4) 

should improve the speed of executions 

at the PCX. 

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 

section 19(b)(2) of the Act,8 that the 

proposed rule change (File No. SR–

PCX–2004–78) be, and hereby is, 

approved.

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated 

authority.9

Margaret H. McFarland, 

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 04–21838 Filed 9–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 4844] 

Culturally Significant Objects Imported 

for Exhibition Determinations: ‘‘Comic 

Grotesque: Wit and Mockery in 

German Art, 1870–1940’’

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the 

following determinations: Pursuant to 

the authority vested in me by the Act of 

October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 

2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 

27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and 

Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 

2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et 

seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of