58834 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Notices

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).

10As required under Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii), the

Exchange provided the Commission with written

notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change

at least five business days prior to the filing date.

11 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).

12 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii).

13 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

1 15 U.S.C. 788s(b)(1).

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange revised the

proposed rule to allow computer-generated orders

to be sent to the Exchange via the Member Firm

Interface (‘‘MFI’’) if they are properly designated as

such. See Letter from Michael Pierson, Vice

President, Regulatory Policy, PCX, to Nancy J.

Sanow, Assistant Director, Division of Market

Regulation, Commission, dated August 15, 2000

(‘‘Amendment No. 1’’).

the requirements of Section 6(b)(5)7 of

the Act because it is designed to prevent

fraudulent and manipulative acts and

practices, to promote just and equitable

principles of trade, to foster cooperation

and coordination with persons engaged

in facilitating transactions in securities,

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 on Burden on Competition

The Exchange does not believe that

the proposed rule change 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

The Exchange has neither solicited

nor received written comments on the

proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for

Commission Action

Because the 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) does not become operative for 30

days from the date of filing, or such

shorter time as the Commission may

designate if consistent with the

protection of investors and the public

interest, the proposed rule change has

become effective pursuant to Section

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

4(f)(6) 9 thereunder.10

A proposed rule change filed under

rule 19b–4(f)(6) 11 normally does not

become operative prior to 30 days after

the date of filing. However, Rule 19b–

4(f)(6)(iii) 12 permits the Commission to

designate a shorter time if such action

is consistent with the protection of

investors and public interest. The

Exchange seeks to have the proposed

rule change become operative on or

before September 30, 2000, in order to

allow the Pilot to continue in effect on

an uninterrupted basis.

The Commission, consistent with the

protection of investors and the public

interest, has determined to make the

proposed rule change operative

immediately through November 30,

2000. The extension of the Pilot will

provide the Commission with additional

time to review and evaluate the 3-Year

Extension Proposal.

The Commission notes that unless the

Pilot is extended, the Pilot will expire

and the provisions in Sections 312.01,

312.03 and 312.04 of the Exchange’s

Listed Company Manual that were

amended in the Pilot will revert to that

which were effective prior to June 4,

1999. The Commission believes that

such a result could lead to confusion.

Based on these reasons, the

Commission believes that it is

consistent with the protection of

investors and the public interest that the

proposed rule change become operative

immediately through November 30,

2000. 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, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 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 filing will also be

available for inspection and copying at

the principal office of the NYSE. All

submissions should refer to File No.

SR–NYSE–00–38 and should be

submitted by October 23, 2000.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.13

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–25134 Filed 9–29–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 34–43328; File No. SR–PCX–

00–13]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Filing and Order Granting

Accelerated Approval of a Proposed

Rule Change by the Pacific Exchange,

Inc. Relating to the Entry of ComputerGenerated Orders

September 22, 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 May 16,

2000, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (‘‘PCX’’

or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities

and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’) the proposed

rule change as described in Items I, II

and III below, which Items have been

prepared by the Exchange. On August

16, 2000, the Exchange filed

Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule

change.3 The Commission is publishing

this notice of filing and order granting

accelerated approval to the proposed

rule change.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Terms of Substance of

the Proposed Rule Change

The Exchange proposes to adopt Rule

6.88 (‘‘Rule’’) to restrict the entry of

certain electronically created option

orders on the Exchange via the

Exchange’s Member Firm Interface

(‘‘MFI’’). The text of the Rule is set forth

below.

POETS

Pacific Options Exchange Trading System

Rule 6.88

(a) POETS is the Exchange’s automated

trading system comprised of the options

order routing system, the automated

execution system (Auto-Ex), the on-line limit

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Notices 58835

4See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 27633

(January 18, 1990), 55 FR 2466 (January 24, 1990)

(approving implementation of POETS). POETS is

the Exchange’s automated trading system. It is more

fully described infra.

5 ISE Rule 717(f) states:

‘‘Members may not enter, nor permit the entry of,

orders created and communicated electronically

without manual input (i.e., order entry by Public

Customers or associated persons of Members must

involve manual input such as entering the terms of

the order into an order-entry screen or manually

selecting a displayed order against which an offsetting order should be sent), unless such orders are

non-marketable limit order to buy (sell) that are

priced higher (lower) than the best bid (offer) on the

Exchange (i.e., limit orders that improve the best

price available on the Exchange). Nothing in this

paragraph, however, prohibits Electronic Access

Members from electronically communicating to the

Exchange orders manually entered by customers

into front-end communications systems (i.e.,

Internet gateways, online networks, etc.).’’ See

Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42455

(February 24, 2000), 65 FR 11388 (March 2, 2000)

(approving application of ISE for registration as a

national securities exchange).

6See PCX Rules 6.52(a) (types of orders permitted

to be maintained in the limit order book), 6.75(a)–

(b) (priority of bids and offers), 6.86 (guaranteed

markets for public customers) and 6.87(a)

(eligibility of public customers for use of Auto-Ex

System).

order book system (Auto-Book), and the

automatic market quote update system (AutoQuote). Orders may be sent to POETS via the

Exchange’s Member Firm Interface (MFI).

(b) Except as provided in subsection (b)(1),

Member firms may not enter orders via the

MFI or permit the entry of orders via the MFI

if those orders are created and communicated

electronically without manual input

(‘‘computer generated orders’’). Except as

provided in subsection (b)(1), order entry by

public customers or associated persons of

Member Firms must involve manual input

such as entering the terms of an order into

an order-entry screen or manually selecting

a displayed order so that the order will be

sent. Nothing in this Rule prohibits Member

Firms from electronically sending to the

Exchange orders manually entered by

customers into front-end communications

systems (e.g., Internet gateways, online

networks, etc).

(1) Computer generated orders may be sent

to the Exchange via the MFI only if they are

properly designed with a ‘‘CG’’ in the

‘‘additional instruction’’ field. Orders so

designated will be re-routed for

representation by a Floor Broker. Computer

generated orders are not eligible for

automatic execution via the Auto-Ex System.

¶5232 Exchange Sponsored Hand Held

Terminals for Floor Brokers

Rule 6.89[6.88]—No change.

¶5233 Proprietary Brokerage Order

Priority Terminals

Rule 6.90[6.89]—No change.

* * * * *

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

Exchange 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 V below. The

Exchange has prepared summaries, set

forth in Sections A, B and 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 purpose of the proposed rule

change is to restrict the direct entry of

certain option orders that are created

and communicated electronically, i.e.,

without manual imput, into the

Exchange’s POETS system.1 The

Exchange represents that the text of the

Rule is similar to the text of Rule 717(f)

of the International Securities Exchange

(‘‘ISE’’).5

Subsection (a) of the Rule briefly

describes the POETS system.

Specifically, Subsection (a) states that

POETS is the Exchange’s automated

trading system comprised of the options

order routing system, the automatic

execution system (‘‘Auto-Ex’’), the online limit order book system (‘‘AutoBook’’), and the automatic market quote

update system (‘‘Auto-Quote’’).

Subsection (a) further states that orders

may be sent to POETS via the

Exchange’s MFI. This subsection is

intended to provide background for the

provision on computer-generated

orders, which is contained in

Subsection (b).

Subsection (b) states that except as

provided in subsection (b)(1), member

firms may not enter orders via the MFI

or permit the entry of orders via the MFI

if those orders are created and

communicated electronically without

manual input. Subsection (b) defines

such orders as ‘‘computer-generated

orders.’’ It further states that, except as

provided in subsection (b)(1), order

entry by public customers or associated

persons of member firms must involve

manual input such as entering the terms

of an order into an order-entry screen or

manually selecting a displayed order so

that the order will be sent. It further

states that nothing in the Rule prohibits

member firms from electronically

sending orders that are manually

entered by customers into front-end

communications system (e.g., Internet

gateways, online networks, etc.) to the

Exchange.

Subsection (b)(1) of the Rule states

that computer-generated orders may be

sent to the Exchange via the MFI only

if they are properly designated with a

‘‘CG’’ in the ‘‘additional instruction’’

field. Orders so designated will be rerouted for representation by a floor

broker. Finally, Subsection (b)(1) states

that computer-generated orders are not

eligible for automatic execution via the

Auto-Ex system.

The Exchange represents that its

business model depends upon market

makers for competition and liquidity.

Public customer orders on the PCS

receive priority over market maker bids

and offers.6 The Exchange believes that

allowing electronic entry directly into

the Exchange’s POETS system could

give customers with order-generating

systems a significant advantage over

market makers. In its view, this could

undercut the Exchange’s business

model. The Exchange notes that under

the proposed rule change, computergenerated orders can still be sent for

execution on the Exchange; however,

they may not be sent for execution

directly via POETS. The Exchange also

notes that the Rule is similar to ISE Rule

717(f); however, the ISE Rule permits

computer-generated orders to be entered

on the ISE only if they are

‘‘nonmarketable limit orders to buy

(sell) that are priced higher (lower) than

the best bid (offer) on the Exchange.’’ By

contrast, the PCX proposal allows all

computer-generated orders to be entered

on the PCX.

Currently, PCX member firms that are

located off the trading floor may send

option orders to the trading floor in

three different ways. First, a member

firm representative may call a PCX

member firm representative on the

trading floor on the telephone and place

an order. The member firm

representative, while present in a

member firm booth on the trading floor,

would then either have the order taken

manually to a floor broker in the trading

crowd for representation of the order, or

have the order sent electronically to a

floor broker (via a hand-held terminal)

in the trading crowd who would then

represent it. Second, a member firm

58836 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 191 / Monday, October 2, 2000 / Notices

7See PCX Rule 6.88.

8See PCX Rule 6.2(h)(4)(C).

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

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

11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Section 6(b)(5) requires that

the rules of a national securities exchange be

designed to, among other things, promote just and

equitable principles of trade, remove impediments

to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open

market, and, in general, to protect investors and the

public interest. It also requires that those rules not

be designed to permit unfair discrimination

between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.

12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8). Section 6(b)(8) requires that

the rules of the exchange do not impose any burden

on competition not necessary or appropriate in

furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

13 In approving this proposal, the Commission has

considered the proposed rule’s impact on

efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15

U.S.C. 78c(f).

14See supra note 4.

15 Id.

representative may send an order to a

member firm representative in a booth

on the trading floor via an electronic

transmitter. (This transmitter would be

proprietary equipment of a member

firm). The member firm representative

in the booth would then have the order

represented in the trading crowd in one

of the two ways described above. Third,

a member firm representative may send

an order electronically through the MFI,

which links member firms with the

Exchange’s electronic trading system,

POETS. Eligible orders sent through the

MFI to POETS may be: (1)

Automatically executed against orders

in the limit order book; (2) placed in the

limit order book (if they are not

marketable); (3) automatically executed

via Auto-Ex; or (4) routed to a floor

broker hand-held terminal in the trading

crowd.

Accordingly, under the rule change,

computer-generated orders may be sent

to the Exchange in any of the three ways

described above. However, if they are

submitted electronically to the

Exchange via the MFI, they must be

properly identified with a ‘‘CG’’

indicator. All properly identified

computer-generated orders that are sent

via the MFI will be re-routed for

representation by a floor broker. When

an order is re-routed, it is transmitted

either: (1) To a member firm booth on

the trading floor; or (2) to a floor broker

in the trading crowd via the floor broker

hand-held terminal,7 depending upon

the instructions of the member firm that

is responsible for the order. As noted

above, orders transmitted to a member

firm booth may be subsequently

transmitted to a floor broker in the

trading crowd either by placing the

order telephonically 8 or by manually

taking the order to the floor broker in

the crowd. An order that is transmitted

to a floor broker may be placed in the

limit order book for representation by

the Order Book Official as long as that

order is a ‘‘non-broker/dealer customer

order.’’

The Exchange notes that under the

rule change, properly marked computergenerated orders that are sent via the

MFI will be-routed in the same manner

in which broker-dealer orders that are

sent via the MFI are currently re-routed.

When a broker-dealer order is routed to

a floor broker in the trading crowd, the

order is vocalized and, if the order

represents the best bid or offering price

on the PCX, the Market Quote Terminal

Operator (‘‘MQTP’’) will cause the order

to be displayed. Computer-generated

orders for the accounts of broker-dealers

will be handled in the same manner

under the proposed rule change.

However, if a computer-generated order

is for the account of a public customer,

it may be represented by a floor broker

in the trading crowd, in which case the

MQTO will cause it to be displayed, or

the floor broker may place the order in

the limit order book, in which case the

Order Book Official at that trading post

will cause it to be displayed and will

continue to represent it.

2. Statutory Basis

The Exchange believes the proposed

rule change is consistent with with

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

furthers the objectives of Section

6(b)(5),10 in particular, in that it

facilitates transactions in securities,

removes impediments to and perfects

the mechanism of a free and open

market and a national market system,

and promotes just and equitable

principles of trade.

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 that is not

necessary or appropriate in furtherance

of the purpose of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Comments on the

Proposed Rule Change Received From

Members, Participants, or Other

Written comments on the proposed

rule change were neither solicited nor

received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for

Commission Action

The PCX has requested that the

proposed rule change be given

expedited review and accelerated

effectiveness pursuant to Section

19(b)(2) of the Act.

IV. Commission’s Findings and Order

Granting Accelerated Approval of the

Proposed Rule Change

After careful review, the Commission

finds that the proposed rule change is

consistent with the provisions of the Act

applicable to a national securities

exchange, particularly Section 6(b)(5) 11

and Section 6(b)(8) 12 of the Act, and the

rules and regulations thereunder.13

The Commission has carefully

considered whether the Rule inhibits

competition between the PXC’s

automated customers and those who do

not employ automated means of order

entry. The Commission notes that in the

equity markets, for example, limit

orders from public customers have been

a valuable source of quote competition.

Nonetheless, the Commission

recognizes that the PCX’s business

model depends on market makers for

competition and liquidity. Allowing

electronic order entry into Auto-Ex

could give automated customers a

significant advantage over market

makers. This could undercut the PCX’s

business model. Moreover, the Rule

would allow electronically generated

orders to be sent o the Exchange via the

MFI if they are properly designated with

a ‘‘CG’’ in the instruction field. Properly

designated orders are then routed to the

trading crowd for representation by a

floor broker. However, the order is not

eligible for execution through Auto-Ex.

The Commission approved a similar

rule for the fully automated options

exchange, the ISE. In approving the

application of the ISE for registration as

a national securities exchange, the

Commission explicitly recognized that

the ISE’s business model ‘‘depends on

market makers for competition and

liquidity.’’ 14 Recognizing that allowing

electronic order entry into the ISE could

‘‘give automated customers a significant

advantage over [the ISE’s] market

makers,’’ the Commission stated that it

was unable to conclude that the

limitation violated the statutory

requirements.15

ISE Rule 717(f) regarding computergenerated orders specifically permits the

entry of non-marketable limited orders

that improve the best price available on

the ISE. This provision is designed to

accommodate non-marketable limit

orders because these orders serve to

increase competition and improve

quotes. Similarly, non-marketable

electronically generated limit orders

that improve the best price on the PCX

will be permitted to enter the Exchange

through the MFI, if they are properly

designated with a ‘‘CG’’ in the

‘‘additional instruction’’ field. These

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: