48914 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 17, 1997 / Notices

6 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).

7 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

1 15 U.S.C. § 78s(b)(1) (1994).

and observed that participants with

excess cash which could be withdrawn

by 11:00 a.m. elected not to do so. PTC

was advised by its participants that 1:00

p.m. would be a more appropriate cutoff time to request return of prefunding

payments.

II. Discussion

Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act 6

requires that the rules of a clearing

agency be designed to assure the

safeguarding of securities and funds

which are in the custody or control of

PTC or for which it is responsible. By

extending the time to request return of

prefunding payments to 1:00 p.m.,

PTC’s participants will be better able to

determine whether prefunding

payments on deposit with PTC will be

required to support transactions at PTC.

Furthermore, PTC is not changing the

Program’s requirement whereby PTC

will not return any prefunding

payments unless the requesting

participant is within its net free equity

and net debit monitoring level controls

at the time the request is made.

Therefore, the Commission believes that

even with the later cut-off time for

requesting return prefunding payments

PTC should be able to continue to

provide for the intraday return of

prefunding payments while still

assuring the safeguarding of securities

and funds in its custody or control.

III. Conclusion

On the basis of the foregoing, the

Commission finds that the proposal is

consistent with the requirements of the

Act and in particular with the

requirements of Section 17A of the Act

and the rules and regulations

thereunder.

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the

proposed rule change (File No. SR–

PTC–97–03) be, and hereby is,

approved.

For the Commission by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.7

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–24588 Filed 9–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 34–39044; File No. SR–Phlx–

97–41]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness

of Proposed Rule Change by the

Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.

Relating to Registration Fees for

Registered Representatives

September 10, 1997.

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Act’’) 1, notice is hereby given that on

August 25, 1997, 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 Phlx. 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 Phlx seeks to amend its fee

schedule pertaining to registration for

Registered Representatives (‘‘RR’’).

Below is the text of the proposed rule

change. Additions are italicized;

deletions are in brackets.

* * * * *

Phlx fee structure

Membership Dues or Foreign Currency User Fees* ........................................................................................ $1000.00 semi-annually.

Application Fee .................................................................................................................................................. 200.00.

Initiation Fee—Members, Participants and Approved Lessors ......................................................................... 1500.00.

Transfer Fee ...................................................................................................................................................... 500.00.

Trading Post/Booth ............................................................................................................................................ 375.00 quarterly.

Floor Facility Fees ............................................................................................................................................. 187.50 quarterly.

Direct Wire to Floor ........................................................................................................................................... 60.00 quarterly.

Telephone System Line Extensions .................................................................................................................. 22.50 monthly/per extension.

Execution Services/Communication Charge ..................................................................................................... 200.00 monthly.

Stock Execution Machine Registration Fee (Equity Floor) ............................................................................... 300.00 per unit.

Equity, Option or FCO Transmission Charge ................................................................................................... 750.00 monthly.

FCO pricing tape ............................................................................................................................................... 600.00.

Option Report Service:

New York .................................................................................................................................................... 600.00.

Chicago ...................................................................................................................................................... 800.00.

Examinations Fee** ........................................................................................................................................... 1000.00 monthly.

Technology Fee ................................................................................................................................................. 100.00 monthly.

Registered Representative Registration:

Initial ........................................................................................................................................................... 12.00 [$10.00].

Maintenance ............................................................................................................................................... 12.00 annual [$10.00 annual].

Transfer ...................................................................................................................................................... 12.00 [$10.00].

*An exemption from foreign currency user fees is extended to PHLX members also holding title to a foreign currency options participation.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 17, 1997 / Notices 48915

2Securities Exchange Act Release No. 32833

(September 14, 1993), 58 FR 48922 (September 20,

1993) [File No. SR–Phlx–93–24].

3Securities Exchange Act Release No. 36348

(October 6, 1995), 60 FR 53450 (October 13, 1995)

[File No. SR–Phlx–95–59].

4 15 U.S.C. § 78f(b)(4) (1994).

5See e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No.

36733 (January 17, 1996), 61 FR 1954 (January 24,

1996) [File No. SR–AMEX–95–55]; Securities

Exchange Act Release No. 36119 (August 18, 1995),

60 FR 44372 (August 25, 1995) [File No. SR–CBOE–

95–31]; Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35796

(June 1, 1995), 60 FR 30625 (June 9, 1995) [File No.

SR–NYSE–95–20]; Securities Exchange Act Release

No. 38112 (January 3, 1997), 62 FR 1350 (January

9, 1997) [File No. SR–NASD–96–53]; Securities

Exchange Act Release No. 29954 (November 18,

1991), 56 FR 59315 (November 25, 1991) [File No.

SR–PSE–91–37]; and Securities Exchange Act

Release No. 31425 (November 9, 1992); 57 FR 54371

(November 17, 1997) [File No. SR–PSE–92–31].

6 15 U.S.C. § 78s(b)(3)(A)(1994).

7 17 CFR 240.19b–4(e)(1997).

**This fee is applicable to member/participant organizations for which the PHLX is the DEA. The following organizations are exempt: (1) inactive organizations; (2) organizations operating from the PHLX trading floor which have demonstrated that at least 25% of their income as reflected on the most recently submitted FOCUS Report was derived from floor activities; (3) organizations for any month where they incur transaction or clearance fee charges directly by the Exchange or by its registered subsidiary, provided that the fees exceed the examinations fee for

that month; and (4) organizations affiliated with an organization exempt from this fee due to the second or third category. Affiliation includes an

organization that is a wholly owned subsidiary of, or by under common control with, an ‘‘exempt’’ member or participant organization. An inactive

organization is one which had no securities transaction revenue, as determined by semi-annual FOCUS reports, as long as the organization continues to have no such revenue each month.

* * * * *

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 Phlx proposes to increase its fees

for the initial, maintenance and transfer

of RR registration with the Exchange

from $10.00 to $12.00. These fees,

which were adopted in 1993,2 and

subsequently adjusted in 1995,3 were

intended to offset Exchange regulatory

costs based on the number of

registrations maintained by member

organizations. The registration fees are

payable by member organizations that

apply for, maintain and transfer RR

registrations. Specifically, the Exchange

will increase the $10.00 fee for all initial

RR registrants to $12.00. The $10.00

annual maintenance fee also will

increase to $12.00 for each RR. Lastly,

the $10.00 fee for transfers of RR

registrations will increase to $12.00.

This increase will become effective

upon the November 1997 billing for the

January 1998 fee, which is conducted

and collected for the Exchange by the

National Association of Securities

Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’). The $12.00 fees

apply to 1998 registrations. Any initial

registration in 1997 would continue to

be subject to the $10.00 initial

registration fee. Any maintenance and

transfer fees incurred for calendar year

1997 would continue to be subject to the

$10.00 maintenance or transfer fee.

The purpose of the proposed rule

change is to address the increased costs

associated with maintaining a fair and

orderly market in Exchange products

due to growing trading volume which

drives the need for enhanced automated

surveillance in an increasingly

sophisticated trading environment. The

proposed fee increase also addresses an

increase in the number of listed

products traded by the Exchange as

‘‘primary issues,’’ the number of trading

vehicles with new features, and the

number of surveillance investigations

conducted, including the resultant

disciplinary actions.

The Exchange continues to believe

that a strong regulatory program is

essential to an exchange’s ability to

maintain a fair and orderly market for

the investment community. Since the

adoption of the RR fees, the Exchange

has listed additional issues and new

products, triggering additional

regulatory costs. Most notably, the

general costs associated with the

Exchange’s regulatory program have

continued to rise. Inflationary increases

have also affected the cost of staffing,

equipment, technology and other

continuing expenses, which have risen

since the last increase in 1995.

2. Statutory Basis

The proposed registration fee increase

is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the

Act 4 in that it provides for the equitable

allocation of reasonable dues, fees or

charges among the Exchange’s members

and issuers and other persons using its

facilities. The Exchange notes that the

implementation of such a fee is similar

to other exchanges, including the

American Stock Exchange, Chicago

Board Options Exchange, New York

Stock Exchange, NASD and Pacific

Exchange. 5 The Exchange believes that

the fee increase from $10.00 to $12.00

is reasonable in light of increasing

regulatory costs and the anticipated

1998 budgetary costs since the fee was

last adjusted in 1995.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Burden on Competition

The Phlx does not believe that the

proposed rule change will 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 either

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 establishes

or changes a due, fee, or other charge

imposed by the Exchange and, therefore,

has become effective on August 25,

1997, pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of

the Act 6 and subparagraph (e) of Rule

19b–4 thereunder.7

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.

Persons making written submissions

should file six copies thereof with the

Secretary, Securities and Exchange

Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20549. 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
48916 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 17, 1997 / Notices

8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) (1997).

Commission and any person, other than

those that may be withheld from the

public in accordance with the

provisions of 5 U.S.C. § 552, will be

available for inspection and copying in

the Commission’s Public Reference

Section, 450 Fifth Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such

filing will also be available for

inspection and copying at the principal

office of the Phlx. All submissions

should refer to File No. SR–Phlx–97–41

and should be submitted by October 8,

1997.

For the Commission by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.8

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–24590 Filed 9–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Reporting and Recordkeeping

Requirements Under OMB Review

ACTION: Notice of reporting requirements

submitted for review.

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

Chapter 35), agencies are required to

submit proposed reporting and

recordkeeping requirements to OMB for

review and approval, and to publish a

notice in the Federal Register notifying

the public that the agency has made

such a submission.

DATES: Comments should be submitted

on or before October 17, 1997. If you

intend to comment but cannot prepare

comments promptly, please advise the

OMB Reviewer and the Agency

Clearance Officer before the deadline.

COPIES: Request for clearance (OMB 83–

1), supporting statement, and other

documents submitted to OMB for

review may be obtained from the

Agency Clearance Officer. Submit

comments to the Agency Clearance

Officer and the OMB Reviewer.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Agency Clearance Officer: Jacqueline

White, Small Business Administration,

409 3RD Street, SW., 5th Floor,

Washington, D.C. 20416, Telephone:

(202) 205–6629.

OMB Reviewer: Victoria Wassmer,

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, New Executive Office Building,

Washington, DC. 20503.

Title: SBA Counseling Evaluation.

Form No: 1419.

Frequency: Annually.

Description of Respondents: Small

Business Clients.

Annual Responses: 2,800.

Annual Burden: 476.

Dated: September 11, 1997.

Jacqueline White,

Chief, Administrative Information Branch.

[FR Doc. 97–24645 Filed 9–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Docket No. WTO/D–17]

WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding

Regarding Certain Indonesian

Measures Affecting the Automobile

Industry

AGENCY: Office of the United States

Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 127(b)(1)

of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act

(URAA) (19 U.S.C. 3537(b)(1)), the

Office of the United States Trade

Representative (USTR) is providing

notice that, at the request of the United

States, a dispute settlement panel has

been established under the Agreement

Establishing the World Trade

Organization (WTO), to examine certain

Indonesian measures affecting the

automobile industry. More specifically,

in this dispute the United States alleges

that the Indonesian measures in

question are inconsistent with several

WTO agreements, including Articles I:1,

III:2, and III:7 of the General Agreement

on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994);

Article 2 of the Agreement on Traderelated Investment Measures (TRIMs

Agreements); Articles 3, 20 and 65 of

the Agreement on Trade-Related

Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights

(TRIPs Agreement); and Article 28.2 of

the Agreement on Subsidies and

Countervailing Measures (SCM

Agreement); In addition, the United

States alleges that the measures in

question constitute subsidies that cause

‘‘serious prejudice’’ to the interests of

the United States in view of Articles 6

and 27 of the SCM Agreement. USTR

also invites written comments from the

public concerning the issues raised in

the dispute.

DATES: Although USTR will accept any

comments received during the course of

the dispute settlement proceedings,

comments should be submitted on or

before October 3, 1997, to be assured of

timely consideration by USTR in

preparing its first written submission to

the panel.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be

submitted to Ileana Falticeni, Office of

Monitoring and Enforcement, Room

501, Attn: Indonesia Automobile

Industry Dispute, Office of the U.S.

Trade Representative, 600 17th Street,

N.W., Washington, DC 20508.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William D. Hunter, Assistant General

Counsel, (202) 395–3582, or Mary

Latimer, Office of Asia & the Pacific,

(202) 395–4755.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June

12, 1997, the United States requested

the establishment of a WTO dispute

settlement panel to examine whether

certain Indonesian measures affecting

the automobile industry are inconsistent

with Indonesia’s obligations under

several WTO agreements, and whether

such measures constitute subsidies that

cause serious prejudice to the interests

of the United States under the SCM

Agreement. Previously, on April 17,

1997 and May 12, 1997, Japan and the

European Communities (EC),

respectively, had requested the

establishment of a panel regarding some

of the same measures, making claims

that were similar to, but narrower in

scope than, those made by the United

States. On June 12, 1997, the WTO

Dispute Settlement Body (DSB)

established a panel to examine the

complaints of Japan and the EC. On July

30, 1997, the DSB established a panel to

examine the U.S. complaint, and

decided to consolidate the U.S. panel

with the Japan/EC panel established

earlier. Under normal circumstances,

the panel, which will hold its meetings

in Geneva, Switzerland, would be

expected to issue a report detailing its

findings and recommendations within

twelve months after it is established.

Major Issues Raised by the United

States and Legal Basis of Complaint

In 1993, Indonesia adopted a system

of incentives for manufacturers of motor

vehicles and parts in the form of duty

reductions on imports of certain

products and tax reductions on the sale

of motor vehicles. These incentives are

conditional on compliance with local

content requirements with respect to

inputs. In February, 1996, Indonesia

expanded this system of incentives to

provide additional tax and tariff

incentives designed to promote a

‘‘national car’’ that was produced by an

Indonesian company, carried a unique

Indonesian trademark, and had a

gradually-increasing percentage of local

content over the ensuing three years.

Indonesia made a modification to this

program in June, 1996, when it