Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Notices 58837

16See PCX Rule 6.86(a).

17See supra note 5.

18Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43285

(September 12, 2000), 65 FR 56972 (September 20,

2000) (approving SR–CBOE–00–01). 19 17 CFR 200.30–3a(a)(12).

orders will be routed from the MFI to

the trading crowd for representation by

a floor broker.

Although the ISE and PCX rules are

not identical, both ISE Rule 717(f) and

PCX Rule 6.88 permit non-marketable

limit orders that improve the price to be

sent to the exchange and routed to the

relevant trading mechanism for

execution. It is the Commission’s view

that the Exchange’s approach strikes a

reasonable balance. It provides

protection to PCX market makers; at the

same time, it permits properly

designated electronically generated

orders to be represented by a floor

broker in the trading crowd. As it stated

with respect to its approval of ISE Rule

717(f), the Commission is unable to

conclude that the new PCX Rule

violates any statutory requirements.

The Commission further notes that

the Rule does not prohibit electronically

generated orders from being sent to the

PCX; rather, merely prevents them from

being entered into Auto-Ex. Thus,

properly designated electronically

generated orders will be routed through

the MFI to the trading crowd for

representation by a floor broker. PCX

rules require that all customer orders be

executed at the PCX’s displayed bid or

offer at the time the order is represented

in the crowd.16 Depending upon the

circumstances, the order may be filled at

a price better than the PCX’s displayed

bid or offer. Therefore, although,

electronically generated customer orders

will not be eligible for automatic

execution through Auto-Ex under the

Rule, they will still be entitled to

receive an execution price that is as

good as or better than the PCX’s

displayed bid or offer.

The Commission finds good cause for

approving the proposed rule change, as

amended, prior to the thirtieth day after

publication of notice thereof in the

Federal Register pursuant to Section

19(b)(2) of the Act. Specifically, the

Commission has approved similar

proposals filed by the ISE 17 and the

Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc.

(‘‘CBOE’’).18 Approval of this proposal

on an accelerated basis will enable the

PCX to compete on an equal basis with

these other exchanges and thus is

consistent with Section 6(b)(8) of the

Act.

V. 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. 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, 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 PCX. All submissions

should refer to File No. SR–PCX–00–13

and should be submitted by October 23,

2000.

VI. Conclusion

For the reasons discussed above, the

Commission finds that the proposal is

consistent with the Act and the rules

and regulations thereunder.

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to

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

proposed rule change (SR–PCX–00–13),

as amended, adopting Rule 6.88, is

approved.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority. 19

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–25133 Filed 9–29–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Region IX District Advisory Council

Public Meeting

The U.S. Small Business

Administration Hawaii District

Advisory Council, will hold a public

meeting at 10 a.m. on Wednesday

October 11, 2000 located at the Business

Information and Counseling Center,

1111 Bishop Street, Suite 204, Training

Center, Honolulu, HI to discuss such

matters as may be presented by

members, staff of the U.S. Small

Business Administration, or others

present. For further information write or

call Andrew K. Poepoe, District Director

U.S. Small Business Administration,

300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Room 2–235,

Honolulu, Hawaii (808) 541–2965.

Bettie Baca,

Counselor to the Administrator/Public

Liaison.

[FR Doc. 00–25186 Filed 9–29–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

2000–2001 Allocation of the Raw Cane

Sugar, Refined Sugar, and Sugar

Containing Products Tariff-rate Quotas

AGENCY: Office of the United States

Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Office of the United

States Trade Representative (USTR) is

providing notice of the country-bycountry allocation of the in-quota

quantity of the raw cane sugar, refined

sugar, and sugar-containing products

tariff-rate quotas for the period that

begins October 1, 2000 and ends

September 30, 2001.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Inquiries may be mailed or

delivered to Karen Ackerman,

Agricultural Economist, Office of

Agricultural Affairs (Room 421), Office

of the United States Trade

Representatives, 600 17th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20508.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Karen Ackerman, Office of Agricultural

Affairs, 202–395–6127.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to Additional U.S. Note 5 to chapter 17

of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of

the United States (HTS), the United

States maintains tariff-rate quotas for

imports of raw cane and refined sugar.

The Secretary of Agriculture establishes

the in-quota quantity the raw cane sugar

and refined sugar tariff-rate quotas.

Section 404(d)(3) of the Uruguay

Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C.

3601(d)(3)) authorizes the President to

allocate the in-quota quantity of a tariffrate quota for any agricultural product

among supplying countries or customers

areas. The President delegated this

authority to the United States Trade

Representative under paragraph (3) of

Presidential Proclamation No. 6763 (60

FR 1007).

Accordingly, a tariff-rate quota

quantity for raw cane sugar of 1,117,195

metric tons raw value, the minimum

level to which the United States is

committed under the Uruguay Round

Agreement, is being allocated to the

following countries:

58838 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Notices

Country FY2001

allocation

Argentina .................................. 45,283

Australia .................................... 87,408

Barbados .................................. 7,372

Belize ........................................ 11,584

Bolivia ....................................... 8,425

Brazil ......................................... 52,700

Colombia ................................... 25,274

Congo ....................................... 7,258

Cote d’Ivoire ............................. 7,258

Costa Rica ................................ 15,797

Dominican Republic .................. 185,346

Ecuador .................................... 11,584

El Salvador ............................... 27,381

Fiji ............................................. 9,478

Gabon ....................................... 7,258

Guatemala ................................ 50,549

Guyana ..................................... 12,637

Haiti ........................................... 7,258

Honduras .................................. 10,531

India .......................................... 8,425

Jamaica .................................... 11,584

Madagascar .............................. 7,258

Malawi ....................................... 10,531

Mauritius ................................... 12,637

Mexico ...................................... 7,258

Mozambique ............................. 13,690

Nicaragua ................................. 22,115

Panama .................................... 30,540

Papua New Guinea .................. 7,258

Paraguay .................................. 7,258

Peru .......................................... 43,177

Philippines ................................ 142,169

South Africa .............................. 24,221

St. Kitts & Nevis ....................... 7,258

Swaziland ................................. 16,850

Taiwan ...................................... 12,637

Thailand .................................... 14,743

Trinidad-Tobago ....................... 7,372

Uruguay .................................... 7,258

Zimbabwe ................................. 12,637

Total ................................... 1,117,195

These allocations are based on the

countries’ historical trade to the United

States. The allocations of the raw sugar

tariff-rate quota to countries that are net

importers of sugar are conditioned on

receipt of the appropriate verifications.

A tariff-rate quota quantity for refined

sugar of 10,300 metric tons raw value

(11,354 short tons raw value) is

allocated to Canada as a result of an

agreement reached with that country. In

addition, 2,954 metric tons raw value

(3,256 short tons raw value) of refined

sugar will be allocated to Mexico. The

remainder of the refined sugar tariff-rate

quota quantity of 38,000 metric tons raw

value will be available on a first-come,

first-served basis, including the 17,656

metric tons raw value (19,462 short tons

raw value) reserved for specialty sugars.

A quantity of sugar-containing

products of 59,250 metric tons (65,312

short tons) of the tariff-rate quota for

certain sugar-containing products

maintained under ‘‘Additional U.S.

Note 8 to chapter 17 to the Harmonized

Tariff Schedule of the United States’’ is

allocated to Canada as a result of an

agreement with Canada. The remainder

of the sugar-containing products tariffrate quota will be available for other

countries. Conversion factor: 1 metric

ton = 1.10231125 short tons.

USTR is allocating an additional

quantity of 105,788 metric tons raw

value (116,611 short tons raw value), the

quantity which the United States

committed to provide to Mexico under

the North American Free Trade

Agreement (NAFTA), to Mexico.

Charlene Barshefsky,

United States Trade Representatives.

[FR Doc. 00–25106 Filed 9–29–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3190–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent To Request Renewal

From the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) of Three Current Public

Collections of Information

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) (DOT)

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), the FAA invites public

comment on 3 current public

information collections which will be

submitted to OMB for renewal.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before December 1, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed

or delivered to FAA, at the following

address: Ms. Judy Street, Room 612,

Federal Aviation Administration,

Standards and Information Division,

APF–100, 800 Independence Avenue,

S.W., Washington, DC 20591.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Judy Street, at the above address or on

(202) 267–9895.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA

solicits comments on any of the current

collections of information in order to

evaluate the necessity of the collection,

the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of

burden, the quality, utility, and clarity

of the information to be collected, and

possible ways to minimize the burden of

collection. Also note that an agency may

not conduct or sponsor, and a person is

not required to respond to, a collection

of information unless it displays a

currently valid OMB control number.

Following are short synopses of the 3

information collection activities which

will be submitted to OMB for requests

for renewal:

1. 2120–0021, Certification: Pilots and

Flight Instructors. The FAA is

empowered to issue airmen certificates

to properly qualified persons. This

clearance request covers the burden

imposed on airmen directly responsible

for the control of aircraft. 14 CFR part

61 prescribes requirements for pilot and

flight instructor certificates. Information

collected is used to determined

compliance and applicant eligibility.

The number of respondents is estimated

to be 770,000. The current burden for

this collection is estimated to be

252,000 hours for reporting and

recordkeeping.

2. 2120–0036, Notice of Landing Area

Proposal. 14 CFR part 157 requires that

each person who intends to construct,

activate, deactivate, or changes the

status of an airport, runway, or taxiway

shall notify the FAA. FAA Form 7480–

1, Notice of Landing Area Proposal, is

used to collect the required information

on an as needed basis. The current

burden is estimated to be 2,500 hours,

and the estimated number of

respondents is estimated to be 3,400.

3. 2120–0620, Special Federal

Aviation Regulation No. 71. SFAR No.

71 applies to air tour operators in

Hawaii. SFAR 71 requires air tour

operators to verbally brief the

passengers on safety particularly related

to overwater operations before each air

tour flight.

Issued in Washington, DC on September

26, 2000.

Steve Hopkins,

Manager, Standards and Information

Division, APF–100.

[FR Doc. 00–25263 Filed 9–29–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Approval of Noise Compatibility

Program Cleveland Hopkins Airport

Cleveland, OH

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) announces its

findings on the noise compatibility

program submitted by the city of

Cleveland, Cleveland, Ohio, under the

provisions of Title I of the Aviation

Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979

(Public Law 96–193) and 14 CFR Part

150. These findings are made in

recognition of the description of Federal

and nonfederal responsibilities in

Senate Report No. 96–52 (1980). On