56608 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

1 7 U.S.C. 1a(6) (2000). The Act and the 

Commission’s regulations issued thereunder can be 

accessed at http://www.access.gpo.gov/uscode/ 

title7/chapter1_.html and http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr, respectively. 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated September 1, 2005, and 

effective September 15, 2005, is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 6011—Area Navigation Routes. 

* * * * * 

T–204 Taylor, FL to Brunswick, GA [New] 

Taylor, FL (TAY) ........................................... VORTAC ........................................................ (lat. 30°30′17′′ N., long. 82°33′11′′ W.) 

Brunswick, GA (SSI) ..................................... VORTAC ........................................................ (lat. 31°03′02′′ N., long. 81°26′46′′ W.) 

T–205 Valdosta, GA to Ocala, FL [New] 

Valdosta, GA (OTK) ...................................... VOR/DME ...................................................... (lat. 30°46′50′′ N., long. 83°16′47′′ W.) 

Ocala, FL (OCF) ............................................ VORTAC ........................................................ (lat. 29°10′39′′ N., long. 82°13′35′′ W.) 

T–206 Cross City, FL to MONIA [New] 

Cross City, FL (CTY) ..................................... VORTAC ........................................................ (lat. 29°35′57′′ N., long. 83°02′55′′ W.) 

MONIA .......................................................... WP ................................................................. (lat. 30°28′49′′ N., long. 82°02′53′′ W.) 

T–207 Waycross, GA to Ormond Beach, FL [New] 

Waycross, GA (AYS) ..................................... VORTAC ........................................................ (lat. 31°16′10′′ N., long. 82°33′23′′ W.) 

MONIA, FL .................................................... WP ................................................................. (lat. 30°28′49′′ N., long. 82°02′53′′ W.) 

Cecil, FL (VQQ) ............................................. VOR ............................................................... (lat. 30°12′47′′ N., long. 81°53′27′′ W.) 

CARRA ........................................................... WP ................................................................. (lat. 29°43′51′′ N., long. 81°36′29′′ W.) 

Ormond Beach, FL (OMN) ........................... VORTAC ........................................................ (lat. 29°18′12′′ N., long. 81°06′46′′ W.) 

T–208 Gators, FL to CARRA [New] 

Gators, FL (GVN) ........................................... VORTAC ........................................................ (lat. 29°41′32′′ N., long. 82°16′23′′ W.) 

CARRA ........................................................... WP ................................................................. (lat. 29°43′51′′ N., long. 81°36′29′′ W.) 

T–210 Taylor, FL to Cecil, FL [New] 

Taylor, FL (TAY) ........................................... VORTAC ........................................................ (lat. 30°30′17′′ N., long. 82°33′10′′ W.) 

Cecil, FL (VQQ) ............................................. VOR ............................................................... (lat. 30°12′47′′ N., long. 81°53′27′′ W.) 

T–211 Ocala, FL to CARRA [New] 

Ocala, FL (OCF) ............................................ VORTAC ........................................................ (lat. 29°10′39′′ N., long. 82°13′35′′ W.) 

JUTTS ............................................................ WP ................................................................. (lat. 29°36′00′′ N., long. 82°02′00′′ W.) 

CARRA ........................................................... WP ................................................................. (lat. 29°43′51′′ N., long. 81°36′29′′ W.) 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

15, 2005. 

Edith V. Parish, 

Acting Manager, Airspace and Rules. 

[FR Doc. 05–19290 Filed 9–27–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Part 1 

RIN 3038—AC20 

Definition of ‘‘Client’’ of a Commodity 

Trading Advisor 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rules. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (Commission or 

CFTC) is proposing to amend Rule 

1.3(bb) by adding to that rule a 

definition of the term ‘‘client,’’ as it 

relates to commodity trading advisors 

(CTAs) (Proposal). This would clarify 

inconsistencies in the Commission’s 

regulations concerning the advisees of 

CTAs. The Proposal would also reflect 

the Commission’s longstanding view 

that its antifraud authority extends to all 

CTAs, irrespective of whether they 

provide advice on a personalized or 

nonpersonalized basis. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 28, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on the Proposal 

should be sent to Jean A. Webb, 

Secretary, Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 

1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20581. Comments may be sent by 

facsimile transmission to (202) 418–

5528, or by e-mail to secretary@cftc.gov. 

Reference should be made to ‘‘Proposed 

Rule Regarding the Definition of ‘Client’

of a Commodity Trading Advisor.’’

Comments may also be submitted by 

connecting to the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal at http://www.regulations.gov and 

following the comment submission 

instructions. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Barbara S. Gold, Associate Director, or 

R. Stephen Painter, Jr., Staff Attorney, 

Division of Clearing and Intermediary 

Oversight, Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 

1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20581, telephone number: (202) 418–

5450 or (202) 418–5416, respectively; 

facsimile number: (202) 418–5528; and 

electronic mail: bgold@cftc.gov or 

spainter@cftc.gov, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. The Proposal 

A. Background 

Section 1a(6)(A) of the Commodity 

Exchange Act (Act) 1 defines the term 

‘‘commodity trading advisor’’ to mean 

any person who: 

(i) For compensation or profit, engages in 

the business of advising others, either 

directly or through publications, writings, or 

electronic media, as to the value of or the 

advisability of trading in—

(I) Any contract of sale of a commodity for 

future delivery made or to be made on or 

subject to the rules of a contract market or 

derivatives transaction execution facility; 

(II) Any commodity option authorized 

under section 4c; or 

(III) Any leverage transaction authorized 

under section 19; or 

(ii) For compensation or profit, and as part 

of a regular business, issues or promulgates 

analyses or reports concerning any of the 

activities referred to in clause (i). 

Under the language of Section 

1a(6)(A) of the Act, the term 

‘‘commodity trading advisor’’ can 

include advisors who provide 

nonpersonalized advice, such as 

publishers of advisory newsletters or 

Web sites, as well as advisors who 

provide advice tailored to the needs of 

particular persons and advisors who 

direct other persons’ trading pursuant to 

a power of attorney or other written 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules 56609 

2These excluded persons include, among others, 

teachers and publishers. In this regard, the 

Commission notes that, for a teacher or publisher 

to claim the exclusion from the CTA definition in 

Section 1a(6)(B) of the Act, the trading advice 

activity may not be the sole teaching or publishing 

activity, but instead must be solely incidental to the 

teacher’s or publisher’s other teaching and 

publishing activities. See e.g., In the Matter of 

Armstrong, et al., [1992–1994 Transfer Binder] 

Comm. Fut. L. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 25,657 (CFTC Feb. 8, 

1993) (holding that publishers of standardized 

advice are not excluded from the definition of CTA 

where publication is ‘‘largely devoted to advice 

about trading commodity futures or options 

contracts’’). 

3Commission rules cited to herein are found at 

17 CFR Ch. I (2005). 

4The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 

2000 (CFMA) amended the statutory definition of 

‘‘commodity trading advisor’’ to take account of the 

new type of trading facility known as a ‘‘derivatives 

transaction execution facility.’’ See Commodity 

Futures Modernization Act of 2000, Pub. L. 106–

554, Appendix E, 114 Stat. 2763, Section 

123(a)(1)(A). The Commission intends to make a 

conforming change to its rules in connection with 

final action on the Proposal. The CFMA can be 

accessed through the Commission’s Web site: 

http://www.cftc.gov/files/ogc/ogchr5660.pdf. 

5The Act refers solely to ‘‘clients’’ of CTAs in, for 

example, Section 4k(3)(i), 7 U.S.C. 6k(3)(i) 

(registration of persons associated with CTAs), and 

4o(1)(A) and (B), 7 U.S.C. 6o(1)(A) and (B) 

(antifraud provisions applicable to CTAs). The 

regulations refer solely to ‘‘clients’’ of CTAs in, for 

example, Rules 4.30 (prohibited activities of CTAs) 

and 4.41(a) (advertising by CTAs). 

6For example, Section 4n(3)(A) of the Act, 7 

U.S.C. 6n(3)(A), and Rule 4.33 (recordkeeping 

requirements for CTAs) refer to ‘‘clients’’ and 

‘‘subscribers’’ of CTAs. 

The Act also refers to ‘‘subscribers’’ other than 

advisees of CTAs, but these provisions are not 

relevant for the purposes of the Proposal. See, e.g., 

Section 1a(1)(C) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. 1a(1)(C) 

(definition of alternative trading system) and 

Section 5f(b) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. 7b–1(b) 

(designation of securities exchanges and 

associations as contract markets). 

7When Congress originally defined the term 

‘‘commodity trading advisor’’ in 1974, the 

definition included any person providing trading 

advice ‘‘either directly or through publications or 

writings.’’ With the advent of various electronic 

media, Congress expanded the CTA definition in 

1982 to include ‘‘publications, writings or 

electronic media.’’ Pub. L. 97–444, 96 Stat. 2294, 

Sec. 201 (Jan. 11, 1983) (emphasis added). Since 

1982, these electronic media have proliferated, now 

including the Internet, email, and any number of 

software programs developed by CTAs. By defining 

‘‘client’’ of a CTA using the terms of the statutory 

CTA definition, the Commission intends to update 

the scope of that term to include subscribers to, and 

other advisees of, the various electronic or print 

media now available. 

8The usual presumption that different terms in a 

statute have separate meanings is rebutted as to the 

terms ‘‘client’’ and ‘‘subscriber’’ in the provisions 

of the Act regulating CTAs, by the language of the 

introductory provision, Section 4l(1), which lists 

‘‘subscriptions’’ as one of the ‘‘arrangements with 

clients’’ entered into by CTAs. This language 

implies that, in connection with CTAs, a person 

who arranges for a subscription, in other words a 

‘‘subscriber,’’ is a type of ‘‘client.’’ Moreover, a 

definition of ‘‘client’’ that excludes ‘‘subscribers’’

would not make sense in light of the language of 

Section 1a(6)(A)(i) of the Act defining a 

‘‘commodity trading advisor’’ to include a person 

who provides advice ‘‘through publications, 

writings, or electronic media.’’ The customers of 

such CTAs could reasonably be described as 

‘‘subscribers,’’ but there is no logical reason for 

such customers to receive less protection under the 

statute than other customers of CTAs. 

9 7 U.S.C. 6o. 

10Commodity Trend Serv., Inc. v. CFTC, 233 F.3d 

981 (7th Cir. 2000); R & W Technical Servs. Ltd. v. 

CFTC, 205 F.3d 165 (5th Cir. 2000); CFTC v. Vartuli, 

228 F.3d 94 (2d Cir. 2000). 

11Commodity Trend Serv., 233 F.3d at 981. 

12 Id. at 991. 

13 7 U.S.C. 6m(1). 

authorization. Section 1a(6)(B) of the 

Act excludes certain persons from the 

CTA definition where, as provided for 

in Section 1a(6)(C) of the Act, their 

furnishing of advice with respect to 

trading in commodity futures and 

options is solely incidental to the 

conduct of their business or profession.2

Rule 1.3(bb) 3 contains essentially the 

same definition of the term ‘‘commodity 

trading advisor’’ as that contained in 

section 1a(6) of the Act.4 However, 

neither the Act nor the Commission’s 

regulations issued thereunder define 

who the ‘‘others’’ are that are advised by 

CTAs. Moreover, neither the Act nor the 

regulations are consistent when 

referring to these advisees. Although 

most of the relevant provisions refer 

solely to ‘‘clients,’’ 5 a few of the 

provisions refer to ‘‘clients and 

subscribers.’’ 6 The Proposal is intended 

to clarify these inconsistencies.7

Specifically, the Proposal is intended to 

clarify that, as used in provisions of the 

Act and the regulations relating to 

CTAs, the term ‘‘client’’ refers to all 

customers of a CTA, including persons 

who receive advice by subscribing to a 

newsletter or other information service. 

A ‘‘subscriber,’’ then, as used in these 

statutory provisions and rules, is one 

type of ‘‘client.’’ 8

In addition, the Commission believes 

that defining the term ‘‘client’’ of a CTA 

is necessary as a result of several court 

cases in which various CTAs have 

argued that, because the antifraud 

provisions of Section 4o of the Act 9

refer to ‘‘client’’ rather than ‘‘client or 

subscriber,’’ those provisions apply only 

to CTAs who provide advice on a 

personalized basis.10 As explained more 

fully below, the proposed definition 

would clarify that Section 4o applies to 

all CTAs, and not just to those who 

provide advice on a personalized basis. 

In this regard, the Commission notes 

that the only federal appeals court to 

have reached the merits of the meaning 

of the term ‘‘client’’ in Section 4o, the 

Seventh Circuit in Commodity Trend 

Service,11 deferred to the Commission’s 

interpretation of Section 4o, finding that 

the Commission’s position was a 

reasonable interpretation of the 

statutory language and that it appeared 

to effectuate Congressional intent. The 

court held that the use of the term 

‘‘client’’ in Section 4o does not connote 

only a personalized relationship. 

Instead, according to the court, the term 

‘‘client’’ ‘‘can refer to * * * those who 

receive tailored advice from 

professionals or those who receive any 

kind of service regardless of whether it 

is personalized.’’ 12

B. Proposed Rule 1.3(bb)(2) 

The Commission is proposing to add 

paragraph (bb)(2) to Rule 1.3, which 

would define the term ‘‘client,’’ as it 

relates to a CTA, as including: 

Any person (i) to whom a commodity 

trading advisor provides advice, for 

compensation or profit, either directly or 

through publications, writings, or electronic 

media, as to the value of, or the advisability 

of trading in, any contract of sale of a 

commodity for future delivery made or to be 

made on or subject to the rules of a contract 

market or derivatives transaction execution 

facility, any commodity option authorized 

under section 4c of the Act, or any leverage 

transaction authorized under section 19 of 

the Act; or (ii) to whom, for compensation or 

profit, and as part of a regular business, the 

commodity trading advisor issues or 

promulgates analyses or reports concerning 

any of the activities referred to [above]. The 

term ‘client’ includes, without limitation, any 

subscriber of a commodity trading advisor. 

The proposed definition, then, would 

include clients to whom a CTA provides 

personalized trading advice as well as 

clients to whom a CTA provides 

nonpersonalized trading advice. Such 

nonpersonalized advice would include, 

among other things, standardized advice 

provided by newsletters, seminars, 

tutorials, periodicals, computer 

software, Internet Web sites, voicemail 

recordings, e-mails, and facsimiles. The 

definition also would cover advice 

provided over a period of time pursuant 

to a subscription arrangement or on a 

one-time basis. 

Because the proposed definition of 

‘‘client’’ of a CTA would include a 

person to whom the CTA provides 

advice on either a personalized or 

nonpersonalized basis, it would make 

clear that the antifraud provisions of 

Section 4o of the Act apply to all 

persons who come within the statutory 

definition of the term ‘‘commodity 

trading advisor,’’ and not, for example, 

just to those who provide personalized 

trading advice or who direct their 

clients’ trading—i.e., CTAs who must 

register as such with the Commission 

pursuant to Section 4m(1) of the Act.13

This view is consistent with the 

Commission’s longstanding 

interpretation of the provisions of 

Section 4o of the Act. Specifically, more 

than 25 years ago, in explaining why it 

56610 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

14 43 FR 32291, 32292 (July 26, 1978) (emphasis 

added). 

The Commission additionally explained that 

‘‘Section 4o basically makes it unlawful, among 

other things, for any CTA to defraud an existing or 

prospective client or subscriber.’’ Id. at n.2 

(emphasis added). 

15 65 FR 12938, 12941 (March 10, 2000); see also 

68 FR 47221, 47222 (Aug. 8, 2003) (providing for 

additional CTA registration exemptions, but noting 

that ‘‘regardless of registration status, all persons 

who come within the * * * CTA definition are 

subject to * * * provisions of the Act and the 

Commission’s rules prohibiting fraud that apply to 

* * * CTAs’’; see also 68 FR 34790, 34791 (June 

11, 2003) (expanding the class of account managers 

permitted to bunch orders to include, among others, 

CTAs who are exempt from the registration 

requirement, but noting that ‘‘the Commission will 

retain antifraud and antimanipulation authority 

over account managers who are exempt from 

registration.’’) 

The Commission has consistently enforced the 

antifraud provisions of Section 4o against both 

registered CTAs and CTAs not required to register 

under the Act. E.g., In the Matter of Stephen Alan 

Pierce, CFTC Docket No. 02–15 (January 21, 2003) 

(‘‘Section 4o of the Act prohibits both registered 

and unregistered CTAs from defrauding their 

clients.’’); In the Matter of Michael Radcliffe, CFTC 

Docket No. 02–04 (June 10, 2002); In the Matter of 

CTS Fin. Publ’g, Inc., et al., CFTC Docket No. 00–

34 (July 5, 2001). 

16 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. 

17 47 FR 18618 (April 30, 1982). 

18 Id. at 18620. 

19 5 U.S.C. 605(b). 

20 7 U.S.C. 19(a). 

adopted certain exemptions from CTA 

registration—as opposed to exclusions 

from the CTA definition—the 

Commission rejected the notion that 

Section 4o applies solely to CTAs who 

have a personalized relationship with 

their advisees, stating: 

Section 4o should remain applicable to the 

persons covered by the rule because * * * 

their clients and subscribers are entitled to 

the protections of the antifraud provisions 

whether or not these persons remain 

obligated to be registered[.] 14

More recently, in connection with its 

adoption of Rule 4.14(a)(9), the 

Commission expressly noted that a CTA 

exempt from registration by virtue of its 

offering nonpersonalized advice and its 

not directing client accounts 

nevertheless remains subject to the 

provisions of the Act that apply to all 

CTAs, including the antifraud 

provisions of Section 4o.15

II. Related Matters 

A. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(RFA) 16 requires that agencies, in 

proposing rules, consider the impact of 

those rules on small businesses. The 

Commission has previously established 

certain definitions of ‘‘small entities’’ to 

be used by the Commission in 

evaluating the impact of its rules on 

such entities in accordance with the 

RFA.17

With respect to CTAs, the 

Commission has previously stated that 

it would evaluate within the context of 

a particular rule proposal whether all or 

some affected CTAs would be 

considered to be small entities and, if 

so, the economic impact on them of the 

proposal.18 The Commission does not 

believe that proposed Rule 1.3(bb)(2) 

would have a significant impact on 

affected CTAs. This is because the only 

burden imposed by the proposed 

amendment would be the obligation to 

comply with the antifraud provisions of 

Section 4o of the Act. Assuming 

arguendo, however, that compliance 

with Section 4o would constitute a 

significant burden, the burden is neither 

new nor additional, because proposed 

Rule 1.3(bb)(2) is consistent with the 

Commission’s longstanding 

interpretation of Section 4o as 

applicable to all CTAs. 

Accordingly, the Chairman, on behalf 

of the Commission, certifies pursuant to 

Section 605(b) of the RFA 19 that the 

proposed rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. However, the 

Commission invites the public to 

comment on this finding. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(‘‘PRA’’) imposes certain requirements 

on Federal agencies (including the 

Commission) in connection with their 

conducting or sponsoring any collection 

of information as defined by the PRA. 

The proposed rule amendment does not 

require a new collection of information 

on the part of any entities. Accordingly, 

for purposes of the PRA, the 

Commission certifies that the proposed 

rule amendment, if promulgated in final 

form, would not impose any new 

reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements. 

C. Cost-Benefit Analysis 

Section 15(a) of the Act 20 requires the 

Commission to consider the costs and 

benefits of its action before issuing a 

new regulation under the Act. By its 

terms, Section 15(a) does not require the 

Commission to quantify the costs and 

benefits of a new regulation or to 

determine whether the benefits of the 

proposed regulation outweigh its costs. 

Rather, Section 15(a) simply requires 

the Commission to ‘‘consider the costs 

and benefits’’ of its action. 

Section 15(a) further specifies that 

costs and benefits shall be evaluated in 

light of five broad areas of market and 

public concern: protection of market 

participants and the public; efficiency, 

competitiveness, and financial integrity 

of futures markets; price discovery; 

sound risk management practices; and 

other public interest considerations. 

Accordingly, the Commission could in 

its discretion give greater weight to any 

one of the five enumerated areas and 

could in its discretion determine that, 

notwithstanding its costs, a particular 

rule was necessary or appropriate to 

protect the public interest or to 

effectuate any of the provisions or to 

accomplish any of the purposes of the 

Act. 

The Proposal is intended to define the 

term ‘‘client’’ of a CTA and to clarify 

that all CTAs are within the purview of 

the antifraud provisions of Section 4o of 

the Act. The Commission is considering 

the costs and benefits of this rule in 

light of the specific provisions of 

Section 15(a) of the Act as follows: 

1. Protection of Market Participants and 

the Public 

Because the Proposal expressly brings 

all CTAs within the purview of the 

antifraud provision of Section 4o of the 

Act, the Proposal should enhance the 

Commission’s ability to protect market 

participants and the public. 

2. Efficiency and Competition 

The Proposal should have no effect, 

from the standpoint of imposing costs or 

creating benefits, on efficiency or 

competition. 

3. Financial Integrity of Futures Markets 

and Price Discovery 

The Proposal should have no effect, 

from the standpoint of imposing costs or 

creating benefits, on the financial 

integrity or price discovery function of 

the commodity futures and option 

markets. 

4. Sound Risk Management Practices 

The Proposal should have no effect, 

from the standpoint of imposing costs or 

creating benefits, on the available range 

of sound risk management alternatives. 

5. Other Public Interest Considerations 

The Proposal should have no effect, 

from the standpoint of imposing costs or 

creating benefits, on any other public 

interest considerations. 

After considering these factors, the 

Commission has determined to propose 

the amendment discussed above. The 

Commission invites public comment on 

its application of the cost-benefit 

provision. Commenters also are invited 

to submit any data that they may have 

quantifying the costs and benefits of the 

Proposal with their comment letters. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules 56611 

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 1 

Brokers, Commodity futures, 

Consumer protection, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

For the reasons presented above, the 

Commission proposes to amend 17 CFR 

part 1 as follows: 

PART 1—GENERAL REGULATIONS 

UNDER THE COMMODITY EXCHANGE 

ACT 

1. The authority citation for part 1 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1a, 2, 5, 6, 6a, 6b, 6c, 

6d, 6e, 6f, 6g, 6h, 6i, 6j, 6k, 6l, 6m, 6n, 6o, 

6p 7, 7a, 7b, 8, 9, 12, 12a, 12c, 13a, 13a–1, 

16, 16a, 19, 21, 23 and 24, as amended by 

the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 

2000, appendix E of Pub. L. 106–554, 114 

Stat. 2763 (2000). 

2. Section 1.3 is proposed to be 

amended by adding new paragraph 

(bb)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 1.3 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

(bb)(1) * * * 

(2) Client. This term, as it relates to a 

commodity trading advisor, means any 

person (i) to whom a commodity trading 

advisor provides advice, for 

compensation or profit, either directly 

or through publications, writings, or 

electronic media, as to the value of, or 

the advisability of trading in, any 

contract of sale of a commodity for 

future delivery made or to be made on 

or subject to the rules of a contract 

market or derivatives transaction 

execution facility, any commodity 

option authorized under section 4c of 

the Act, or any leverage transaction 

authorized under section 19 of the Act; 

or (ii) to whom, for compensation or 

profit, and as part of a regular business, 

the commodity trading advisor issues or 

promulgates analyses or reports 

concerning any of the activities referred 

to in paragraph (bb)(2)(i) of this section. 

The term ‘‘client’’ includes, without 

limitation, any subscriber of a 

commodity trading advisor. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

22, 2005 by the Commission. 

Catherine D. Daniels, 

Assistant Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 05–19323 Filed 9–27–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–M 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

25 CFR Part 61 

RIN 1076–AE44 

Preparation of Rolls of Indians 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: This document reopens the 

comment period for the proposed rule 

published on May 19, 2005, which 

opened the enrollment applications 

process for the Western Shoshone 

Identifiable Group of Indians. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before October 28, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by the number 1076–AE44, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal rulemaking portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Daisy West, Office of Tribal 

Services, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1951 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Mail Stop 

320–SIB, Washington, DC 20240. 

• Hand delivery: Office of Tribal 

Services, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1951 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Room 320–

SIB, Washington, DC 20240. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Daisy West, Office of Tribal Services, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, (202) 513–

7641. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 

19, 2005, the Bureau of Indian Affairs 

published a proposed rule to amend its 

regulations governing the compilation of 

rolls of Indians in order to open the 

enrollment applications process for the 

Western Shoshone Identifiable Group of 

Indians (70 FR 28859). Last year we 

made a commitment to hold meetings 

with the Shoshone people to discuss the 

proposed rule. We were unable, 

however, to schedule the meetings in 

Elko and Reno, Nevada until August 20 

and 27, 2005. We must therefore extend 

the comment period beyond the original 

deadline of July 18, 2005. 

Dated: September 16, 2005. 

Michael D. Olsen, 

Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—

Indian Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 05–19322 Filed 9–27–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–4J–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Parts 1 and 301 

[REG–144615–02] 

RIN 1545–BB26 

Section 482; Methods To Determine 

Taxable Income in Connection With a 

Cost Sharing Arrangement; Hearing 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

change of date of public hearing; and 

extension of time for public comments. 

SUMMARY: This document changes the 

date of the public hearing and provides 

notice of an extension of time for 

submitting comments with respect to a 

notice of proposed rulemaking and 

notice of public hearing on proposed 

regulations that provide guidance 

regarding methods under section 482 to 

determine taxable income in connection 

with a cost sharing arrangement. 

DATES: The public hearing originally 

scheduled for Wednesday, November 

16, 2005, at 10 a.m. is rescheduled for 

Friday, December 16, 2005, at 10 a.m. 

The IRS must receive outlines of the 

topics to be discussed at the hearing by 

Friday, November 25, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: The public hearing is being 

held in the IRS Auditorium, Internal 

Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC. Due to 

building security procedures, visitors 

must enter at the Constitution Avenue 

entrance. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

LaNita Van Dyke of the Publications and 

Regulations Branch, Associate Chief 

Counsel (Procedure and 

Administration), at (202) 622–7180 (not 

a toll-free number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice 

of proposed rulemaking and notice of 

public hearing appearing in the Federal 

Register on Monday, August 29, 2005 

(70 FR 51116), announced that a public 

hearing on proposed regulations 

providing guidance regarding methods 

under section 482 to determine taxable 

income in connection with a cost 

sharing arrangement will be held on 

Wednesday, November 16, 2005, 

beginning at 10 a.m., in the IRS 

Auditorium of the Internal Revenue 

Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC. 

The date of the hearing has changed. 

The hearing is scheduled for Friday, 

December 16, 2005, beginning at 10 a.m. 

in the IRS Auditorium, Internal Revenue