24584 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices

13 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12)

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

2Securities Exchange Act Release No. 39836

(April 7, 1998), 63 FR 18239.

3The proposed rule change will add the

following terms to DTC’s rules: (1) Certificated

security; (2) control; (3) deposit; (4) entitlement

holder; (5) entitlement order; (6) free pledge; (7) free

release; (8) NYUCC; (9) person; (10) pledge; (11)

pledge versus payment; (12) release; (13) release

versus payment; (14) security entitlement; (15)

security certificate; (16) uncertificated security; and

(17) withdrawal.

4The proposed rule change will make technical

revisions to the following terms: (1) Clearing agency

agreement; (2) deliverer; (3) delivery; (4) deposited

security; (5) incomplete transaction; (6) instructor;

(7) minimum amount securities; (8) net addition

securities; (9) participant; (10) payee; (11) payor;

(12) pledge security; (13) pledgee; (14) pledgor; (15)

receiver; (16) securities account; (17) security; (18)

segregated account; and (19) settlement amount.

5 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).

6The staff of the Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System has concurred with the

Commission’s granting of accelerated approval.

Telephone conversation between Kristen Wells,

Senior Analyst, Division of Reserve Bank

Operations, Board of Governors of the Federal

Reserve System, and Jeffrey Mooney, Special

Counsel, Division of Market Regulation,

Commission (April 24, 1998).

Register or within 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 the 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,

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. Copies of the

submissions, 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 persons, 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, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of such

filing will also be available for

inspection and copying at the principal

office of the Exchange. All submission

should refer to File No. SR–CBOE–97–

67 and should be submitted May 26,

1998.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.13

Jonathan G. Katz,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–11747 Filed 5–1–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 34–39924; File No. SR–DTC–

98–01]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The

Depository Trust Company; Order

Granting Accelerated Approval of

Proposed Rule Change to Conform

DTC’s Rules to Revised Article 8 of the

Uniform Commercial Code of the State

of New York

April 27, 1998.

On January 14, 1998, The Depository

Trust Company (‘‘DTC’’) filed with the

Securities and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) a proposed rule change

(File No. SR–DTC–97–14) pursuant to

Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’).1 Notice

of the proposal was published in the

Federal Register on April 14, 1998.2

The Commission received no comment

letters in response to the filing. For the

reasons discussed below, the

Commission is granting accelerated

approval of the proposed rule change.

I. Description

The rule change amends DTC’s rules

to make them consistent with revised

Article 8 of the Uniform Commercial

Code (‘‘UCC’’) as adopted by the State

of New York. Generally, the revisions to

Article 8, which governs the transfer of

securities, reflect that the transfer of

ownership of securities and other

investment vehicles are no longer

effected by the delivery and holding of

certificates. Instead, securities are

transferred by debits and credits to

securities accounts maintained by

securities intermediaries. The rule

change adds new terminology to DTC’s

rules,3 revises certain definitions,4 and

deletes section references based on the

prior version of Article 8. The

amendments do not change the

substance or meaning of DTC’s current

rules.

The rule change also amends DTC

Rule 20 to specifically state that DTC’s

board of directors may be resolution

delegate to the chairman of the board

the power to approve fees and charges.

II. Discussion

Section 17A(b)(3)(F) 5 of the Act

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

the clearing agency or for which it is

responsible. The Commission believes

that the proposed rule changes are

consistent with this requirement

because by conforming its rules to the

revised Article 8 of the UCC, DTC

should help maintain certainty with

respect to the substantive rights and

obligations under New York State’s

version of the UCC that are applicable

to DTC and its participants.

The Commission also believes that

providing DTC’s board of directors with

the authority to delegate to the chairman

of the board the power to approve fees

and charges is consistent with this

requirement because it allows DTC’s

board to act more expeditiously.

DTC has requested that the

Commission find good cause for

approving the proposed rule change

prior to the thirtieth day after the date

of publication of notice of the filing. The

Commission finds good cause for

approving the proposed rule change

prior to the thirtieth day after

publication in order to enable DTC to

revise its rules to be consistent with

New York State’s version of Article 8 of

the UCC as soon as possible.6

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–

DTC–98–01) be, and hereby is, approved

on an accelerated basis.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices 24585

7 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

For the Commission by the Division

of Market Regulation, pursuant to

delegated authority.7

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–11745 Filed 5–1–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Capstone Ventures SBIC, L.P. (License No.

09/79–0413)

Notice of Issuance of a Small Business

Investment Company License

On September 19, 1997, an

application was filed by Capstone

Ventures SBIC, L.P., at 3000 Sand Hill

Road, Bldg. 1, Suite 290, Menlo Park,

California 94025, with the Small

Business Administration (SBA)

pursuant to Section 107.300 of the

Regulations governing small business

investment companies (13 CFR 107.300

(1997)) for a license to operate as a small

business investment company.

Notice is hereby given that, pursuant

to Section 301(c) of the Small Business

Investment Act of 1958, as amended,

after having considered the application

and all other pertinent information, SBA

issued License No. 09/79–0413 on April

7, 1998, to Capstone Ventures SBIC, L.P.

to operate as a small business

investment company.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program No. 59.011, Small Business

Investment Companies)

Dated: April 22, 1998.

Don A. Christensen,

Associate Administrator for Investment.

[FR Doc. 98–11794 Filed 5–1–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 2798]

Bureau of Political-Military Affairs;

Imposition of Missile Proliferation

Sanctions Against Entities in North

Korea and Pakistan

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The United States

Government has determined that

entities in North Korea and Pakistan

have engaged in missile technology

proliferation activities that require

imposition of sanctions pursuant to the

Arms Export Control Act, as amended,

and the Export Administration Act of

1979, as amended (as carried out under

Executive Order 12424 of August 19,

1994).

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 17, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vann H. Van Diepen, Office of

Chemical, Biological and Missile

Nonproliferation, Bureau of PoliticalMilitary Affairs, Department of State,

(202–647–1142).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to Section 73(a)(1) of the Arms Export

Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2797b(a)(1)),

Section 11B(b)(1) of the Export

Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C.

app. 2401b(b)(1)), as carried out under

Executive Order 12924 of August 19,

1994 (hereinafter cited as the ‘‘Export

Administration Act of 1979’’), and

Executive Order 12851 of June 11, 1993,

the United States Government

determined on April 17, 1998, that the

following foreign persons have engaged

in missile technology proliferation

activities that require the imposition of

the sanctions described in Sections

73(a)(2) (B) and (C) of the Arms Export

Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2797b(a)(2) (B)

and (C)) and Sections 11B(b)(1)(B) (ii)

and (iii) of the Export Administration

Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. app.

2410b(b)(1)(B) (ii) and (iii)) on these

entities:

1. Changgwang Sinyong Corporation

(a.k.a. North Korea Mining Development

Trading Corporation) (North Korea) and

its sub-units, successors, and affiliated

companies; and

2. Khan Research Laboratories

(Pakistan) and its sub-units and

successors.

Accordingly, the following sanctions

are being imposed on these entities:

(A) New individual licenses for export

to the entities described above of items

controlled pursuant to the Export

Administration Act of 1979 will be

denied for two years;

(B) New licenses for export to the

entities described above of items

controlled pursuant to the Arms Export

Control Act will be denied for two

years;

(C) No United States Government

contracts involving the entities

described above will be entered into for

two years; and

(D) No products produced by the

entities described above will be

imported into the United States for two

years.

With respect to items controlled

pursuant to the Export Administration

Act of 1979, the export sanction only

applies to exports made pursuant to

individual export licenses.

Additionally, because of the

definition of ‘‘person’’ in section

74(8)(B) of the Arms Export Control Act

(22 U.S.C. 2797c(8)(B)) and North

Korea’s status as a country with a nonmarket economy that is not a former

member of the Warsaw Pact, the

following sanctions shall be applied to

all activities of the North Korean

government relating to the development

of production of missile equipment or

technology and all activities of the

North Korean government affecting the

development or production of

electronics, space systems or

equipment, and military aircraft:

(A) New licenses for export to the

government activities described above

of items controlled pursuant to the

Arms Export Control Act will be denied

for two years;

(B) No U.S. Government contracts

involving the government activities

described above will be entered into for

two years; and

(C) No products produced by the

government activities described above

will be imported into the United States

for two years.

These measures shall be implemented

by the responsible agencies as provided

in Executive Order 12851 of June 11,

1993.

Dated: April 24, 1998.

Eric D. Newsom,

Acting Assistant Secretary of State for

Political Military Affairs.

[FR Doc. 98–11935 Filed 5–1–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–25–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA–97–3052; Notice 2]

Kolcraft Enterprises, Inc.; Grant of

Application for Decision of

Inconsequential Noncompliance

Kolcraft Enterprises of Chicago,

Illinois, has determined that

approximately 107,000 child restraint

systems fail to comply with Federal

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)

No. 213, ‘‘Child Restraint Systems,’’ and

has filed an appropriate report pursuant

to 49 CFR part 573, ‘‘Defects and

Noncompliance Reports.’’ Kolcraft has

also applied to be exempted from the

notification and remedy requirements of

49 U.S.C. Chapter 301—‘‘Motor Vehicle

Safety’’ on the basis that the

noncompliance is inconsequential to

motor vehicle safety.

Notice of receipt of the application

was published, with a 30-day comment

period, on November 25, 1997, in the