Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 1997 / Notices 10603

2The Commission has modified the text of the

summaries submitted by NSCC.

3STS is commonly referred to as the National

Transfer Service.

4The Group of Thirty, established in 1978, is an

independent, non partisan organization composed

of international financial leaders whose focus is on

international economic and financial issues. In

March 1989, the Group of Thirty issued a report

containing nine recommendations to improve

clearance and settlement systems.

5 15 U.S.C. 78q–1. 6 17 CFR 200.20–3(a)(12).

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

In its filing with the Commission,

NSCC included statements concerning

the purpose of and basis for the

proposed rule change and discussed any

comments that it received on the

proposed rule change. The text of these

statements may be examined at the

places specified in Item IV below. NSCC

has prepared summaries, set forth in

sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the

most significant aspects of such

statements.2

(A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

The purpose of the proposed rule

change is to permit NSCC to eliminate

its STS.3 NSCC Rule 42, which

established STS, will be deleted. STS

was originally developed by NSCC in

1976 to provide assistance with the

manual processing of items that were

ineligible at The Depository Trust

Company (‘‘DTC’’). It was established as

an optional service to be used by full

settling participants for the high volume

transfer of DTC ineligible items and for

the high volume transfer and

reregistration of physical securities

through various transfer agencies. STS

was also designed to deliver book

closing items, legal transfers, and

accommodation transfers. Once STS is

eliminated, participants will process

items directly through the appropriate

transfer agent.

The STS process is primarily manual.

STS participants first physically send

envelopes containing securities

certificates to an NSCC office. Pursuant

to the participant’s transfer instructions,

the envelopes are next forwarded by

NSCC to the offices of the indicated

transfer agents, which are located

throughout the United States and

Canada. Upon completion of the

reregistration, the transfer agents return

the certificates to NSCC’s office for pick

up.

A review of STS’ volume during the

1980s shows that STS processed

approximately 670 securities certificates

per day. As a high volume service, STS

was able to take advantage of economies

of scale for the broker-dealer

community. However, after 1987

volume fell dramatically because DTC

began increasing the number of DTC

eligible securities and because the

Group of 30 initiatives caused the

brokerage industry to move towards a

book-entry registration environment

which decreased the movement of

physical securities.4 By 1994, STS’

volume fell 82% to 120 securities

certificates processed per day. The

downward trend continues today. STS

processed just over twenty-five items

per day in October 1996 or about an

80% decrease from its 1994 volume and

a 96% decrease from its 1980s volume.

NSCC expects to eliminate STS thirty

business days after notification to

participants that this proposed rule

change is approved by the Commission.

NSCC believes the proposed rule change

is consistent with the requirements of

Section 17A of the Act 5 and the rules

and regulations thereunder because the

rule proposal will facilitate the prompt

and accurate clearance and settlement of

securities transactions.

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Burden on Competition

NSCC does not believe that the

proposed rule change will have an

impact on or impose a 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 have been

solicited or received. NSCC will notify

the Commission of any written

comments received by NSCC.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for

Commission Action

Within thirty-five 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

ninety 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 NSCC 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.

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

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 NSCC. All submissions should

refer to the file number SR–NSCC–97–

01 and should be submitted by March

28, 1997.

For the Commission by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.6

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–5672 Filed 3–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[License No. 06/06–0288]

Wesbanc Ventures, Ltd; Notice of

License Surrender

Notice is hereby given that Wesbanc

Ventures, Ltd. (‘‘WBV’’), 6411 Rutgers

Street, Houston, Texas 77005, has

surrendered its license to operate as a

small business investment company

under the Small Business Investment

Act of 1958, as amended (‘‘the Act’’).

WBV was licensed by the Small

Business Administration on May 28,

1985.

Under the authority vested by the Act

and pursuant to the regulations

promulgated thereunder, the surrender

of the license was accepted on

December 12, 1996, and accordingly, all

rights, privileges, and franchises derived

therefrom have been terminated.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program No. 59.011, Small Business

Investment Companies.)
10604 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 1997 / Notices

Dated: February 27, 1997.

Don Christensen,

Associate Administrator for Investment.

[FR Doc. 97–5601 Filed 3–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Docket No. WTO/DS–16]

WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding

Regarding European Communities’

Tariff Treatment of Some Computer

Equipment

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 the United States has

requested the establishment of a dispute

settlement panel under the Agreement

Establishing the World Trade

Organization (WTO), to examine tariff

increases by the European Communities

(EC) and its member States on certain

local area network (LAN) equipment

and personal computers (PCs) with

multimedia capacity. More specifically,

the United States has requested the

establishment of a panel to determine

whether the EC has acted inconsistently

with its obligations under Article II of

the General Agreement on Tariffs and

Trade 1994 (GATT 1994) in that the EC

and its member States have increased

tariffs above rates bound during the

Uruguay Round for (1) LAN adapter

cards, (2) other LAN equipment and (3)

PCs with multimedia capability

(including PCs with CD–ROM drives

and cards enabling television reception.)

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 April 2, 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: EC LAN Dispute, Office of the

U.S. Trade Representative, 600 17th

Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20508.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andrea Casson, Attorney, 202–395–

3582 or Matthew Rohde, Director for

Customs Affairs, 202–395–3063, Office

of the U.S. Trade Representative, 600

17th Street, N.W., Washington, DC

20508.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

February 11, 1997, the United States

requested establishment of a WTO

dispute settlement panel to examine

whether the following measures are

inconsistent with the EC’s obligations

under Article II of the GATT 1994: (1)

Regulation No. (EC) 1165/95, which

reclassifies certain LAN adapter cards

from category 8471, ‘‘automatic data

processing machines and units thereof,’’

to category 8517, ‘‘telecommunications

apparatus;’’ (2) the actions of customs

authorities in EC member States in

reclassifying and increasing tariffs on

imports of all types of LAN

equipment—including hubs, in-line

repeaters, converters concentrators,

bridges and routers; and (3) the actions

of customs authorities in EC member

States in reclassifying and increasing

tariffs on imports of PCs with

multimedia capacity.

The WTO Dispute Settlement Body

(DSB) considered the U.S. request at its

meeting on February 25, at which time

a panel was established. Members of the

panel are currently being selected.

Under normal circumstances, the panel

would be expected to issue a report

detailing its findings and

recommendations within six to nine

months after it is established.

Major Issues Raised by the United

States and Legal Basis of Complaint

In its schedule of tariff concessions

under the GATT 1994, the EC and its

member States have agreed to a bound

tariff rate for automatic data processing

(ADP) equipment and units, staged from

the base rate of 4.4 percent ad valorem

in 1995 to 2.5 percent ad valorem in

1999. The EC’s adoption in June 1995 of

the regulation reclassifying certain LAN

adapter cards from the ADP category to

the category for telecommunications

apparatus resulted in an increase in

tariffs on imports of such products to

rates above the bound rate for ADP

equipment.

In addition, since 1995, customs

authorities in EC member States,

including but not limited to those in the

United Kingdom and Ireland, have

reclassified all other types of LAN

equipment from the ADP category to the

telecommunications category,

increasing the tariffs on these products

above the bound ADP rate. Also,

customs authorities in EC member

States, particularly those in the United

Kingdom, have reclassified certain PCs

with multimedia capacity, formerly

dutiable under the ADP category, to the

‘‘video apparatus’’ or ‘‘television’’

categories, dutiable at rates above the

bound rate for ADP equipment.

Article II of the GATT 1994 provides

that each WTO Member shall afford the

trade of other WTO Members treatment

that is no less favorable than that

provided for in the importing Member’s

schedule of tariff concessions, and that

imports shall be not be subject to duties

in excess of those provided for in that

schedule. The United States contends

that, in reclassifying imports of LAN

equipment and multimedia PCs, the EC

and its member States have increased

duties on these products above the

bound rates, and have afforded products

imported from the United States

treatment less favorable than that

provided for in the EC schedule. In the

view of the United States, these actions

are inconsistent with the EC’s

obligations under Article II of the GATT

1994.

Public Comment: Requirements for

Submissions

Interested persons are invited to

submit written comments concerning

the issues raised in the dispute.

Comments must be in English and

provided in fifteen copies. A person

requesting that information contained in

a comment submitted by that person be

treated as confidential business

information must certify that such

information is business confidential and

would not customarily be released to

the public by the commenter.

Confidential business information must

be clearly marked ‘‘BUSINESS

CONFIDENTIAL’’ in a contrasting color

ink at the top of each page of each copy.

A person requesting that information

or advice contained in a comment

submitted by that person, other than

business confidential information, be

treated as confidential in accordance

with section 135(g)(2) of the Trade Act

of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155)—

(1) Must so designate that information

or advice;

(2) Must clearly mark the material as

‘‘SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE’’ in a

contrasting color ink at the top of each

page of each copy; and

(3) Is encouraged to provide a nonconfidential summary of the

information or advice.

Pursuant to section 127(e) of the

URAA, USTR will maintain a file on

this dispute settlement proceeding,

accessible to the public, in the USTR

Reading Room: Room 101, Office of the

United States Trade Representative, 600

17th Street, N.W., Washington DC

20508. The public file will include a

listing of any comments received by

USTR from the public with respect to