Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2001 / Notices 21803

10 In approving this rule, the Commission has

considered the proposed rule’s impact on

efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15

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

11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

12 ‘‘Small order baiting’’ occurs when a customer

limit order for a minimal number of contracts is

entered on one side of the market at a better price

than the disseminated quote, thereby improving the

quote. A large customer order on the other side of

the market is then sent to the Auto-Ex to obtain the

better price set by the small limit order.

13Telephone conversation between Cindy L.

Sink, Senior Attorney, Regulatory Policy, PCX, and

Andrew Shipe, Attorney, Division of Market

Regulation, SEC, April 24, 2001.

14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

16 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

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

III. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited to

submit written data, views and

arguments concerning the foregoing,

including whether the proposal, 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. 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–00–48 and should be

submitted by May 22, 2001.

IV. Commission’s Findings and Order

Granting Accelerated Approval of

Proposed Rule Change

The Commission finds that the

proposed rule change is consistent with

the requirements of the Act and the

rules and regulations thereunder

applicable to a national securities

exchange.10 In particular, the

Commission believes that the proposal

is consistent with sections 6(b)(5) of the

Act,11 which requires, among other

things, that the rules of an Exchange be

designed to promote just and equitable

principles of trade, to remove

impediments to and perfect the

mechanism of a free and open market,

and to protect investors and the public

interest.

The Commission notes that, under

current PCX Rules 6.86 and 6.87,

market-makers taking part in Auto-Ex

are required to be firm for a minimum

of twenty or more contracts at the bid

or offer displayed as the disseminated

market quote. By the operation of these

rules, therefore, a limit order for a small

number of contracts, priced better than

the disseminated quote, would establish

the best bid or offer on the Exchange,

and thereby commit the Exchange’s

market-makers to electronically execute

large numbers of contracts at prices

better than those at which they are

willing to trade.

The proposed rule change would alter

this situation by permitting certain

small limit orders (those for five or

fewer contracts) to be automatically

executed through operation of the PCX’s

Auto-Ex system. Under the proposal,

LMMs would be permitted, at their

discretion, and upon giving five minutes

notice to the crowd, to activate this

function. While the function is active,

market-makers logged on to the Auto-Ex

system would be excused from

compliance with Exchange Rule

6.87(e)(4) and, therefore, permitted to

log off the system. Small limit orders

that improve the best bid or offer would

then be executed, at their limit prices,

against those market-makers who opt to

remain logged on to Auto-Ex, or against

the lead LMM. The intended effect

would be to execute a small limit order

rather than to display it, which

potentially would allow a larger contraside order to enter the POETS system,

execute against it, and trigger the

execution of multiple contracts by

market-makers at prices they did not

quote.

The Commission believes that the

proposed feature should foster a fair and

orderly market by preserving booked

order priority, allowing for efficient

Auto-Ex executions, and limiting the

opportunity for ‘‘small order baiting.’’ 12

The Commission notes that, according

to PCX,13 the proposed rule change

would continue to permit limit orders in

the Exchange’s limit order book to trade

against orders in the POETS/Auto-Ex

system, thereby preserving the priority

of booked orders.

The Commission finds good cause for

approving the proposed rule change

(SR–PCX–00–48) prior to the thirtieth

day after the date of publication of

notice thereof in the Federal Register.

The proposed rule change is designed to

automatically execute small customer

orders at prices better than the

disseminated quote in certain

circumstances. Accordingly, the

Commission finds that there is good

cause, consistent with section 6(b)(5) of

the Act,14 to approve the proposal on an

accelerated basis.

V. Conclusion

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to

section 19(b)(2) of the Act,15 that the

proposed rule change, as amended, (SR–

PCX–00–48) is hereby approved on an

accelereated basis.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.16

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–10747 Filed 4–30–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 34–44218; File No. SR–SCCP–

00–06]

Self-Regulatory Organization; Notice of

Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of

a Proposed Rule Change by Stock

Clearing Corporation of Philadelphia

Relating to Proposed Fees for

Processing of Units of Beneficial

Interest in the Nasdaq 100 Trust,

Series 1

April 25, 2001.

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

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

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

December 8, 2000, Stock Clearing

Corporation of Philadelphia (‘‘SCCP’’)

filed with the Securities and Exchange

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) and on

December 15, 2000, amended, the

proposed rule change as described in

Items I, II, and III, below, which Items

have been prepared by SCCP. 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

SCCP proposes to institute a fee for

the processing of Units of Beneficial

Interest in the Nasdaq 100 Trust, Series

1 (‘‘Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock’’).

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and the

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

In its filing with the Commission,

SCCP 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

21804 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2001 / Notices

2The Commission has modified the text of the

summaries prepared by SCCP.

3Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43717 (Dec.

13, 2000), 65 FR 80976 (Dec. 22, 2000) (File No. SR–

Phlx–00–54).

4 15 U.S.C. 78q–1.

5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).

6 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).

7 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

in Item IV below. SCCP 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 enable SCCP to charge fees

that will apply to trading of Units of

Beneficial Interest in the Nasdaq-100

Index Tracking Stock. On December 13,

2000, the Commission granted

accelerated approval of a proposed rule

change submitted by the Philadelphia

Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘Phlx’’) that,

among other things, amended Phlx’s

rules to permit the trading, pursuant to

unlisted trading privileges (‘‘UTP’’), of

the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock.3

In addition, Phlx has obtained a license

to use the Nasdaq-100 Index in

connection with the trading of the

Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock.

Specifically, SCCP will charge a fee of

$0.30 per trade for all participants while

specialists will pay a $0.50 fee per trade

for the first 1,000 trades and $0.25 for

all subsequent trades. No other SCCP

transaction fees will apply to trades in

the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock.

Upon initiation of trading, SCCP

participants will be notified by means of

a circular of the new fees applicable to

trading in the Nasdaq-100 Index

Tracking Stock.

The proposed fees for transactions in

the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock

are lower than the fees charged for other

equities already processed through

SCCP. It is SCCP’s belief that the

proposed lower fees should encourage

trading of this new product while

ensuring that the amounts collected will

still cover SCCP’s costs of processing

Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock.

SCCP believes that the proposed rule

change is consistent with Section 17A of

the Act4 because it equitably allocates

reasonable fees among SCCP

participants as the fees apply equally to

all participants that trade Nasdaq-100

Index Tracking Stock.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Burden on Competition

SCCP 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 solicited

or received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for

Commission Action

The proposed rule change has become

effective pursuant to section

19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act5 and Rule 19b–

4(f)(2)6 thereunder because the

proposed rule change establishes a fee.

At any time within sixty days of the

filing of such 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.

III. 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, 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. Copies of such filing will also be

available for inspection and copying at

Phlx’s principal office. All submissions

should refer to File No. SR–SCCP–00–06

and should be submitted by May 22,

2001.

For the Commission by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.7

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–10749 Filed 4–30–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Committee Re–Establishment

Re–establishment of Advisory

Committees

We publish this notice following the

provisions of the Federal Advisory

Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463) to reestablish Small Business Administration

(SBA) discretionary advisory

committees. The General Services

Administration’s Committee

Management Secretariat has determined

that re-establishment is in the public

interest.

1. National Advisory Council

The Council will provide advice,

ideas and opinions on SBA programs

and small business issues. The

Council’s scope of activities includes

reviewing SBA programs and informing

SBA of current small business issues. Its

members provide an essential

connection between SBA, SBA program

participants, and the small business

community nationwide.

2. District Advisory Councils

The District Advisory Councils

provide advice and recommendations to

the SBA regarding the effectiveness of

and need for SBA programs, particularly

within the local districts. Official

designations include:

1. Alabama District Advisory Council

(formerly Birmingham District Advisory

Council).

2. Buffalo District Advisory Council.

3. Columbus District Advisory

Council.

4. Connecticut District Advisory

Council (formerly Hartford District

Advisory Council).

5. Georgia District Advisory Council

(formerly Atlanta District Advisory

Council).

6. Hawaii District Advisory Council

(formerly Honolulu District Advisory

Council).

7. Houston District Advisory Council.

8. Indiana District Advisory Council

(formerly Indianapolis District Advisory

Council).

9. Louisiana District Advisory Council

(formerly New Orleans District Advisory

Council).

10. Maine District Advisory Council

(formerly Augusta District Advisory

Council).

11. Minnesota District Advisory

Council (formerly Minneapolis District

Advisory Council).

12. Montana District Advisory

Council (formerly Helena District

Advisory Council).

13. North Florida District Advisory

Council.