Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 104 / Tuesday, May 30, 2000 / Notices 34521

6 15 U.S.C. 78f.

7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

9 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).

10The Exchange provided the Commission with

the five business day notice required by Rule 19b–

4(f)(6) of the Act on March 3, 2000.

11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

12 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).

13 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

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

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

value, pursuant to Phlx Rule 1101A.

The Exchange will announce the

effective date by way of an Exchange

memorandum to the membership, also

serving as notice of the strike price and

position exercise limit changes.

b. Purpose. As stated above, the

purpose of the proposal is to attract

additional liquidity to OTX. A four-forone split, thus reducing the value of the

Index, should have a positive effect on

overall transaction volumes by making

the option premiums more attractive for

retail investors. A reduced value should

thus encourage additional investor

interest. By reducing the value of the

Index, investors will be able to utilize

this trading vehicle while extending a

smaller outlay of capital. This should

attract additional investors, and, in turn,

create a more active and liquid trading

environment.

2. Statutory Basis

For these reasons, Phlx believes that

the proposed rule change is consistent

with Section 6 of the Act 6 in general,

and in particular, with Section 6(b)(5),7

in that it is designed to promote just and

equitable principles of trade, as well as

to protect investors and the public

interest, by establishing a lower index

value, which should, in turn, facilitate

trading in OTX options. The Exchange

believes that reducing the value of the

Index should not raise manipulation

concerns and should not cause adverse

market impact, because the Exchange

will continue to employ its surveillance

procedures and has proposed an orderly

procedure to achieve the index split,

including adequate prior notice to

market participants.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Burden on Competition

The Exchange does not believe that

the proposed rule change will impose

any burden on competition.

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 proposed rule change has been

filed by the Exchange as a ‘‘noncontroversial’’ rule change pursuant to

Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 8 and Rule

19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.9 Because the

foregoing proposed rule change: (1)

Does not significantly affect the

protection of investors or the public

interest, (2) does not impose any

significant burden on competition, and

(3) by its terms does not become

operative for 30 days after the date of

this filing, or such shorter time as the

Commission may designate,10 it has

become effective pursuant to Section

19(b)(3)(A) 11 of the Act and Rule 19b–

4(f)(6) 12 thereunder. The Exchange has

requested that the Commission

accelerate the operative date of the rule

change to permit the Exchange to

implement it immediately. The

Commission has determined, consistent

with the protection of investors and the

public interest, to make the proposed

rule change operative upon filing,

pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the

Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii). Under

Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii), a proposed ‘‘noncontroversial’’ rule change does not

become operative for 30 days after the

date of filing, unless the Commission

designates a shorter time. The

Commission believes that it is

consistent with the protection of

investors and the public interest to

make the proposed rule change

operative upon filing because reducing

the value of the Index should enable

more investors to participate in the

market, thereby promoting liquidity in

the marketplace. At any time within 60

days of the filing of the proposed rule

change, the Commission may summarily

abrogate such rule change if it appears

to the Commission that such action is

necessary or appropriate in the public

interest, for the protection of investors,

or otherwise in furtherance of the

purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited to

submit written data, views, and

arguments concerning the foregoing,

including whether the proposed rule

change is consistent with the Act.

Persons making written submissions

should file six copies thereof with the

Secretary, Securities and Exchange

Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of

the submission, all subsequent

amendments, all written statements

with respect to the proposed rule

change that are filed with the

Commission, and all written

communications relating to the

proposed rule change between the

Commission and any person, other than

those that may be withheld from the

public in accordance with the

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be

available for inspection and copying at

the Commission’s Public Reference

Room. Copies of such filing also will be

available for inspection and copying at

the principal office of the Phlx. All

submissions should refer to File No.

SR–PHLX–00–10 and should be

submitted by June 20, 2000.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.13

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–13415 Filed 5–26–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 34–42800; File No. SR–Phlx–

00–28]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by

the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.

To Divide Its Allocation, Evaluation

and Securities Committee Into Two

Separate Committees: the Equity

Allocation, Evaluation and Securities

Committee and the Option Allocation,

Evaluation and Securities Committee

May 19, 2000.

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 28,

2000, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange,

Inc. (‘‘Phlx’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with

the Securities and Exchange

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the

proposed rule change as described in

Items I, II, and III below, which Items

have been prepared by the Exchange.

The Commission is publishing this

notice to solicit comments on the

proposed rule change from interested

persons.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Terms of Substance of

the Proposed Rule Change

The Exchange proposes to amend

Exchange By-Law, Article X, Section

10–7 and Exchange Rule 500, each

concerning its Allocation, Evaluation

and Securities Committee (‘‘AESC’’), to

divide the AESC into two separate

committees: the Equity Allocation,

Evaluation and Securities Committee

and the Option Allocation, Evaluation

34522 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 104 / Tuesday, May 30, 2000 / Notices

3See Exchange Rule 500.

4See Exchange Rule 501.

5See Exchange Rule 508.

6See Exchange Rule 511(b).

7See Exchange Rules 511(c) to 511(e) and 515.

8See id.

9See Exchange Rules 800 to 899.

10The original proposal did not include a

description of the core members and the annual

members of each of the two new committees.

However, the text of the proposed new Exchange

rules describes the committees and that description

was added to the proposal with the consent of the

Phlx. Phone conversation between Richard S.

Rudolph, Counsel, Phlx, and Michael Gaw,

Attorney, Division of Market Regulation,

Commission, on April 11, 2000.

11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

and Securities Committee. The text of

the proposed rule change is available at

the Phlx and at the Commission.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

In its filing with the Commission, the

Phlx included statements concerning

the purpose of and basis for the

proposed rule change and discussed any

comments it received on the proposed

rule change. The text of these statements

may be examined at the places specified

in Item IV below. The Phlx has prepared

summaries, set forth in Sections A, B,

and C below, of the most significant

aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

1. Purpose

The proposed change to By-Law

Article X, Section 10–7 is intended to

divide the Exchange’s current

Allocation, Evaluation and Securities

Committee into two separate

committees, one for equities and one for

options. The proposed change to Rule

500 is intended to allow the rules

governing the Committees to conform to

the new By-Law.

Currently, the AESC is composed of

persons who are active on both the

equity and options trading floors,

persons who conduct a public securities

business, one Public Governor, and one

Non-Industry Governor, and one NonIndustry Governor.3 The full AESC is

responsible for appointment of

specialist units on each floor; 4

approving the transfer of equities and

options among specialist units on each

floor; 5 allocating both equities and

options to applicant specialist units on

each floor; 6 evaluating the performance

of specialist units on each floor; 7

reallocating equities and options when

warranted due to performance issues

from one specialist unit to another on

each floor; 8 and supervising questions

pertaining to securities admitted to

dealings on the Exchange.9

The proposal to divide the AESC into

separate committees—the Equity

Allocation, Evaluation and Securities

Committee and the Option Allocation,

Evaluation and Securities Committee—

would serve to provide expertise on

each new committee in allocating

securities to, and evaluating

performance of, specialist units on each

trading floor on which the committee

members work and have experience.

Currently, AESC members evaluate

specialists and vote to allocate securities

to equity specialist units and to option

specialist units, regardless of whether

their particular experience is in equities

or options. The proposed new

committees would consist, in part, of

members with experience specific to the

type of security to be allocated and in

the type of specialists to be evaluated.

Each committee would consist of nine

members. Five persons would be

members of both new committees: three

off-floor persons who conduct a

securities business, one Non-Industry

Governor, and one Public Governor.

One of the Governors would chair both

committees. The remainder of the

Equity Allocation, Evaluation and

Securities Committee would consist of

four persons who are active on the

equity trading floor as floor brokers or

specialists. The remainder of the Option

Allocation, Evaluation and Securities

Committee would consist of one person

who is active on the options trading

floor as a floor broker and three persons

who are active on the options trading

floor as specialists, registered options

traders, or floor brokers.

Each new committee would consist of

core members, who would serve a threeyear term that would be renewable once,

and annual members, who would serve

a one-year term that would be

renewable twice. The core members of

the Equity Allocation, Evaluation and

Securities Committee would consist of

three persons who conduct a public

securities business and two persons

who are active on the equity trading

floor as specialists or floor brokers. The

annual members of the Equity

Allocation, Evaluation and Securities

Committee would consist of two

persons who are active on the equity

trading floor as specialists or floor

brokers, the Public Governor, and the

Non-Industry Governor. The core

members of the Option Allocation,

Evaluation and Securities Committee

would consist of three persons who

conduct a public securities business,

one person who is active on the options

trading floor as a floor broker, and one

person who is active on the options

trading floor as a specialist, registered

options trader, or floor broker. The

annual members of the Option

Allocation, Evaluation and Security

Committee would consist of two

persons who are active on the options

trading floor as specialists, registered

options traders, or floor brokers; the

Public Governor; and the Non-Industry

Governor.10

2. Statutory Basis

The Phlx believes the proposed rule

change is consistent with and furthers

the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the

Act.11 Specifically, the Phlx believes

that the proposal would aid in the

perfection of the mechanisms of a free

and open market and a national market

system, and would protect investors and

the public interest, by appointing to an

appropriate committee individuals who

have specific experience and expertise

relating either to equities or to options.

By so doing, the two new committees

would have greater expertise in

allocating securities (either equities or

options) and evaluating specialists than

the single existing committee.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Burden on Competition

The Phlx does not believe that the

proposed rule change would impose any

inappropriate burden on competition.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Comments on the

Proposed Rule Change Received From

Members, Participants, or Others

No written comments were 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 with such longer period (i)

as the Commission may designate up to

90 days of such date if it finds such

longer period to be appropriate and

publishes its reasons for so finding, or

(ii) as to which the Exchange consents,

the Commission will:

(A) By order approve such proposed

rule change; or

(B) Institute proceedings to determine

whether the proposed rule change

should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited to

submit written data, views, and

arguments concerning the foregoing,

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 104 / Tuesday, May 30, 2000 / Notices 34523

12 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

including whether the proposed rule

change is consistent with the Act.

Persons making written submissions

should file six copies thereof with the

Secretary, Securities and Exchange

Commission, 450 Fifth Street NW,

Washington, DC 20549–0609. 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 filings will also be

available for inspection and copying at

the principal office of Phlx. All

submissions should refer to File No.

SR–Phlx–00–28 and should be

submitted by June 20, 2000.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.12

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–13416 Filed 5–26–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Request and

Comment Request

In compliance with Public Law 104–

13, the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995, SSA is providing notice of its

information collections that require

submission to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB). SSA is soliciting

comments on the accuracy of the

agency’s burden estimate; the need for

the information; its practical utility;

ways to enhance its quality, utility and

clarity; and on ways to minimize burden

on respondents, including the use of

automated collection techniques or

other forms of information technology.

I. The information collections listed

below will be submitted to OMB within

60 days from the date of this notice.

Therefore, comments and

recommendations regarding the

information collections would be most

useful if received by the Agency within

60 days from the date of this

publication. Comments should be

directed to the SSA Reports Clearance

Officer at the address listed at the end

of this publication. You can obtain a

copy of the collection instruments by

calling the SSA Reports Clearance

Officer on (410) 965–4145, or by writing

to him at the address listed at the end

of this publication.

1. Electronic Death Registration (EDR)

Survey—0960–NEW.

Background Information

In January 1997, the report ‘‘Toward

an Electronic Death Registration System

in the United States: Report of the

Steering Committee to Reengineer the

Death Registration Process’’ was

prepared by a task force representing

federal agencies (the National Center for

Health Statistics and the Social Security

Administration) and professional

organizations representing funeral

directors, physicians, medical

examiners, coroners, hospitals, medical

records professionals, and vital records

and statistics officials (NAPHSIS). The

committee examined in detail the

feasibility of developing electronic

death registration in the United States.

The conclusion of the report was that

the introduction of automated

registration processes in the States is a

viable means to resolve several

historical and continuing problems in

the process of death registration.

Death certificates are used in the

United States for administrative and

public health purposes. For nearly a

century the States have maintained

centralized vital records agencies to

collect, process and archive death

certificates. Death records are

universally recognized as the primary

source of death information, but

registration processes remain labor

intensive, employ disparate and limited

automated procedures, and require

several professionals at different

locations to complete each of the more

than 2.3 million death certificates

registered each year.

Even though each State has laws

requiring the registration of death

records within a specific time period, a

significant number of certificates are not

appropriately filed, may contain

incorrect or inconsistent entries, or are

not finalized until many weeks after the

death occurred.

The States and federal agencies

understand the shortcomings of death

registration methods currently practiced

in the United Sates. Now that recent

advances in computer and network

access technology allow for the practical

and efficient development and

implementation of automated systems to

register death information, several

registration areas have independently

pioneered electronic death registration

methods. These different approaches

will serve as the basis for developing

standardized EDR attributes, methods

and processes in order that the States

may successfully implement electronic

death registration to satisfy

administrative and statistical death

information needs.

Information Collection

In support of the EDR project, SSA

entered into a contract with the National

Association for Public Health Statistics

and Information Systems to foster the

adoption of a standardized form of EDR

throughout the country. As the

beginning step in the process, this

survey is planned to provide a current

picture of the readiness of the States to

adopt EDR. This will, in turn, assist SSA

to direct available funding anticipated

in future years to those States that

demonstrate sufficient resources,

available technical expertise, and the

political will and statutory readiness to

implement EDR within the contract

timeframe. Respondents to the survey

will be officials from States, U.S.

Territories and the city of New York

with the knowledge and expertise to

complete the survey. One survey will be

sent to each State and territory and New

York City.

Number of Respondents: 55.

Frequency of Response: 1.

Average Burden Per Response: 2

hours.

Estimated Annual Burden: 110 hours.

2. 0960–NEW. Information

Collections Conducted by Adolescent

Employment Readiness Center (AERC)

of Children’s Research Institute on

behalf of SSA.

Background

Opening Doors to the Future for

Adolescents with Special Health Care

Needs, Executive Order (E.O.) 13078

dated March 13, 1998, Increasing

Employment for Adults with

Disabilities, directs that a National Task

Force be established to create a

coordinated and aggressive national

policy to bring adults with disabilities

into gainful employment at a rate that is

as close as possible to that of the general

adult population. E.O. 13078 specifies

that the Task Force ‘‘evaluate and,

where appropriate, coordinate and

collaborate on research and

demonstration priorities of Task Force

member agencies related to employment

of adults with disabilities.’’ In

conjunction with the Task Force’s

Committee on Access to Employment

and Lifelong Learning, the

Subcommittee on Expanding

Employment Opportunities for Young

People with Disabilities was created.

In acknowledgment of its

commitment to serving Supplemental