Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 14367

2Securities Exchange Release No. 34903 (October

27, 1994), 59 FR 55014.

3 In the intervening period, the Commission may

also consider further regulatory initiatives regarding

payment for order flow in light of the comments

received on the proposed amendments, and in light

of the pending inquiries into the Nasdaq market by

the Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice.

4The staff of the Division will not recommend

that the Commission take enforcement action under

Rule 10b–10, if broker-dealers comply with the

requirements of amended Rule 10b–10 as of April

3, 1995. With respect to new customer and annual

account statements, broker-dealers may, of course,

also elect to comply with the requirements of Rule

11Ac1–3 prior to October 2, 1995.

5See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34962

(Nov. 10, 1994), 59 FR 59612. All broker-dealers

registered as government securities brokers and

dealers under Section 15C of the Exchange Act, 15

U.S.C. 78o–5, are excluded from SIPC membership.

While most brokers and dealers registered with the

Commission under Section 15(b) of the Exchange

Act, 15 U.S.C. 78o(b) are required to be SIPC

members, some of these persons are excluded from

SIPC membership, as well. 15 U.S.C. 78lll(12).

Among those excluded from SIPC membership

under the Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970

are broker-dealers whose business consists

exclusively of (a) the distribution of shares of

registered investment open-end companies or unit

investment trusts, (b) the sale of variable annuities,

(c) the business of insurance, or (d) the business of

rendering investment advisory services to registered

investment companies or insurance company

separate accounts. 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(a)(2)(A)(ii).

6 In a report to Congress, the GAO recommended

that government securities brokers and dealers be

required to become members of SIPC, or in the

absence of membership, disclose that they are not

SIPC members. See S. Rep. No. 422, 103rd Cong.,

1st Sess. 16 (1993). Congress subsequently amended

Section 15C of the Exchange Act to prohibit

government securities brokers and dealers from

effecting a transaction in any security in

contravention of Commission rules requiring the

timely disclosure that a customer’s account is not

protected by SIPC. See 15 U.S.C. 78o–5(a)(4).

7Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34962

(November 10, 1994), 59 FR 59612.

8 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(a)(2)(A)(ii).

The effective date of this provision remains April

3, 1995, however, for all other brokers and dealers.

the compensation will be provided

upon written request. The effective date

is April 3, 1995.

On October 27, 1994, the Commission

also proposed for comment amendments

to Rules 11Ac1–3 and 10b–10.2 The

proposed amendments would require

broker-dealers to disclose on

confirmations the range of payment for

order flow received on a per share basis

and to provide a statement that, upon

written customer request, additional

transaction-specific information will be

provided. In new customer and annual

account statements, broker-dealers

would be required to disclose the range

of payment for order flow received on

a per share basis, as well as the

aggregate amount or estimated value of

payment for order flow received on an

annual basis. The proposals also would

require parallel disclosure for orders

subject to internalization/affiliate order

routing. Finally, the proposals would

require broker-dealers to describe their

order-routing policies for all orders,

including those that are subject of

internalization/affiliate order routing,

and describe the extent to which such

orders may enjoy price improvement

opportunities.

The Division of Market Regulation

(‘‘Division’’) is analyzing the issues

raised by the 22 comment letters that

were received. A majority of the

commenters responding to the

proposing release requested that the

effective date of any further changes be

delayed. Several broker-dealers stated

that it would be extremely burdensome

for them to make the systems changes

required by any additional amendments,

given the time and resources demanded

by requirements of the newly-adopted

changes and the transition to three day

settlement. The Division is receiving an

increasing number of inquiries from

broker-dealers regarding

implementation of the adopted rules.

Many broker-dealers indicate that

systems changes must be made soon in

order to be ready for the April 3

effective date. The Division believes that

similar systems changes will be

necessary to implement any additional

requirements based upon the proposed

amendments. 3 It would enhance

efficiency and reduce costs if brokerdealers could make systems changes at

one time rather than potentially be

required to make changes twice to

implement payment for order flow

requirements. The Commission believes,

however, that it is not feasible to have

any additional changes take effect on

April 3.

Accordingly, the Commission believes

that an effective date of October 2, 1995

for Rule 11Ac1–3 and amendments to

Rule 10b–10 relating to payment for

order flow disclosures, adopted on

October 27, 1994 and any additional

amendments would promote an orderly

adjustment to the enhanced disclosure

regime.4 For the reasons discussed

above, the Commission for good cause

finds that notice and solicitation of

comment regarding the effective date is

impracticable, unnecessary, and

contrary to the public interest.

B. SIPC Status Disclosure

In addition, on November 10, 1994,

the Commission adopted amendments

to Rule 10b–10 which, among other

things, require a broker or dealer that is

not a member of the Securities Investor

Protection Corporation (‘‘SIPC’’) to

affirmatively disclose its non-SIPC

status on customer confirmations.5 This

requirement is consistent with the

Commission’s authority under the

Government Securities Act

Amendments of 1993 to require

government securities broker-dealers,

which are excluded from SIPC

membership, to disclose that they are

not SIPC members rather than require

them to become members.6 Congress

believed that disclosure was the

appropriate approach to remedy the gap

in SIPC coverage.

When the Commission adopted this

amendment, it stated that confirmation

disclosure is necessary ‘‘to ensure that

customers are not led to believe that

their accounts are subject to protection

beyond what actually is the case

* * *.’’ 7 The Commission recognized

that in some situations, however, the

costs would exceed the benefits of

disclosure, and thus, adopted an

exclusion from the disclosure

requirement for transactions in

investment company shares where the

investor sends purchase money directly

to a non-affiliated transfer agent,

custodian, or other designated agent of

the issuing investment company.

In a letter dated February 16, 1995,

the Investment Company Institute

(‘‘ICI’’) expressed concern about the

operational consequences, as well as the

policy and investor protection

implications of non-SIPC status

disclosure, and requested that the

Commission consider further amending

Rule 10b–10. In addition, the ICI

requested that the Commission consider

extending the effective date of the

amendment to Rule 10b–10 requiring

disclosure of non-SIPC status. In the

ICI’s view, it will be particularly

burdensome for mutual fund groups to

obtain information about the SIPC status

of their underwriters. By letter dated

December 19, 1994, the College

Retirement Equities Fund raised similar

concerns with respect to broker-dealers

whose business consists exclusively of

the sale of variable annuities.

The Commission, therefore, is

postponing the effective date from April

3, 1995 to October 2, 1995 of the Rule

10b–10 amendment pertaining to nonSIPC disclosure by broker-dealers that

are excluded from SIPC membership

pursuant to Section 3(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the

Securities Investor Protection Act of

1970. 8

Dated: March 10, 1995.

By the Commission.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–6576 Filed 3–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M
14368 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement

30 CFR Part 950

Wyoming Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; approval of

amendment.

SUMMARY: OSM is approving a proposed

amendment to the Wyoming regulatory

program (hereinafter referred to as the

‘‘Wyoming program’’) under the Surface

Mining Control and Reclamation Act of

1977, 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq. (SMCRA).

Wyoming is revising its regulations at

Appendix B—Wildlife Monitoring, both

in response to required amendment sat

30 CFR 950.16(aa), and on its own

initiative. The amendment is intended

to revise the Wyoming program to be

consistent with the corresponding

Federal regulations and SMCRA.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 17, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Guy V. Padgett, Telephone: (307) 261–

5776.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on the Wyoming

Program

On November 26, 1980, the Secretary

of the Interior conditionally approved

the Wyoming program. General

background information on the

Wyoming program, including the

Secretary’s findings, the disposition of

comments, and conditions of approval

of the Wyoming program can be found

in the November 26, 1980, Federal

Register (45 FR 78637). Subsequent

actions concerning Wyoming’s program

and program amendments can be found

at 30 CFR 950.11, 950.12, 950.15 and

950.16.

III. Proposed Amendment

By letter dated November 8, 1994,

Wyoming submitted a proposed

amendment to its program pursuant to

SMCRA (administrative record No. WY–

28–01). Wyoming submitted the

proposed amendment in response to the

required program Amendment at 30

CFR 950.16(aa) an also included a State

initiated change. The provisions of its

program that Wyoming proposed to

revise are: Appendix B—Wildlife

Monitoring, Section C and E. On its own

initiative, at Section C, the State

proposed to modify the requirements for

raptor nest status and production

success surveys. At Section E and in

response to a required amendment

placed on Wyoming’s program at 30

CFR 950.16(aa) in the October 7, 1993,

OSM rulemaking (58 FR 52232),

Wyoming proposed to remove language

that would exclude the need to

promptly report all observations of

migrating and wintering bald eagles or

migrating peregrine falcons.

OSM announced receipt of the

proposed amendment in the December

6, 1994, Federal Register (59 FR 62645),

provided an opportunity for a public

hearing or meeting on its substantive

adequacy, and invited public comment

on its adequacy (administrative record

No. WY–28–09). Because no one

requested a public hearing or meeting,

none was held. The public comment

period ended on January 5, 1995.

III. Director’s Findings

As discussed below, the Director, in

accordance with SMCRA and 30 CFR

732.15 an 732.17, finds that the

proposed program amendment

submitted by Wyoming on November 8,

1994, is no less effective than the

Federal program requirements and no

less stringent than SMCRA.

Accordingly, the Director approves the

proposed amendment.

1. Appendix B, Section C Raptor

Production, Nest Status and Production

Success

As a result of discussions with the

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

(USFWS), the Wyoming Game and Fish

Division (WGFD), and mining industry

biologists, the Wyoming Land Quality

Division (LQD) proposes to modify

requirements for raptor nest status and

production success surveys. Survey

requirements presently include: An

annual search within the permit area

and within a 1 mile perimeter to locate

known and new or previously

unrecorded nests; an initial survey in

March for golden eagle and great horned

owl nests; and mid-May through midJune survey to locate other new raptor

nests and to check the status of known

nest. The current program further

requires that all nest checks are to be

conducted from a distance; that

productivity checks shall be conducted

on active nests; and that the status and

productivity of all nests are to be

reported annually.

The changes being proposed by LQD

are as follows: Modify the requirement

that the golden eagle and great horned

owl nest survey be conducted within 1⁄2

mile of existing mining activities and

those mining activities proposed for the

coming year on or before mid-February

instead of March; require the following

three, thorough surveys covering the

entire permit area and within 1 mile:

During March to locate golden eagle and

great horned owl nests, an April survey

to locate nests of most other species,

and a survey in mid-May through midJune to locate new raptor nests and to

check the status of all known nests. Also

added, is a requirement to conduct

follow up visits for previously identified

nests timed to facilitate documentation

of occupied territories, nest building,

incubation and fledgling success

according to the biology of the species

present and variation in breeding

chronology among study areas.

The above modifications and

additions add more specificity to

Wyoming’s survey requirements and

provide for more desirable survey dates

for gathering data on nests. Earlier

identification of nests (i.e., before eggs

are laid) will allow early mitigation

action and therefore less chance for

conflicts with the mining operations.

The changes mutually agreed to by the

groups involved are not inconsistent

with the Federal program requirements.

The Director is therefore approving the

proposed changes.

2. Appendix B, Section E. Federally

Listed Threatened and Endangered

Species

Wyoming proposes to modify the

introductory paragraph of Section E,

specifying the requirements for

reporting observations of threatened and

endangered species, by (1) removing the

language that would exclude the need to

report observations of migrating and

wintering bald eagles or migrating

peregrine falcons, and (2) adding

language to clarify that reporting

observations of Federally listed

threatened and endangered species must

be to the regulatory authority as

required by the LQD regulation at

Chapter IV, Section 2.(r)(i)(E), unless

otherwise specified by the USFWS in

the approved threatened and

endangered species plan. Item number

(1) above in response to a program

amendment placed on the Wyoming

program as a result of the October 7,

1993, OSM rulemaking (58 FR 52232),

codified at 30 CFR 950.16(aa). The

removal of the language to exclude

reporting of migrating and wintering

bald eagles or migrating peregrine

falcons satisfies the required

amendment at 30 CFR 950.16(aa). The

Director is therefore removing the

required amendment from 30 CFR

950.16. Item number (2) above merely

provides reference to the specific rule

that requires reporting to the regulatory

authority unless otherwise specified by

the USFWS (the Federal agency

responsible for the administration of
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 14369

threatened and endangered species).

The proposed change would make the

reporting requirement in the Appendix

consistent with the corresponding

performance standard at Chapter IV,

Section 2.(r)(i)(E), of Wyoming’s

regulations. In addition, the proposed

change is consistent with the

corresponding Federal reporting

requirement at 30 CFR 816.97(b) and

817.97(b). Based on the above

discussion, the Director is approving

both modifications to Section E.

IV. Summary and Disposition of

Comments

Following are summaries of all

substantive written comments on the

proposed amendment that were

received by OSM, and OSM’s responses

to them.

1. Public Comments

OSM invited public comments on the

proposed amendment, but none were

received.

2. Federal Agency Comments

Pursuant to § 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM

solicited comments on the proposed

amendment from various Federal

agencies with an actual or potential

interest in the Wyoming program.

The U.S. Bureau of Mines responded

on November 30, 1994, that it had no

comment (administrative record No.

WY–28–10).

The U.S. Corps. of Engineers

responded on December 1, 1994, saying

that they found the changes to be

satisfactory to their agency

(administrative record No. WY–28–11).

The Mine Safety and Health

Administration (MSHA) responded on

December 16, 1994, that the

amendments do not conflict with

MSHA’s regulations and do not appear

to affect the health and safety of the

Nation’s miners (administrative record

No. WY–28–12).

The Bureau of Land Management

responded on December 28, 1994, that

the monitoring requirements appeared

to prescribe a comprehensive and

appropriate wildlife monitoring effort,

but suggested that a cross check with

the minimum data standards prepared

for the Regional Coal Teams be made to

make sure the State regulations are

consistent with those standards. The

Wyoming program requires extensive

premining data gathering whose level of

detail must be determined in

consultation with the Wyoming Game

and Fish Department and other Federal

agencies having responsibility for

management or conservation of such

environmental activities (Wyoming rule

at Chapter II, Section 2., (a), (vi), (G)). A

statement of how the applicant will

utilize monitoring methods as specified

in Appendix B is required in the permit

application (Wyoming rule at Chapter II,

Section 2, (b), (vi), (b). Wyoming also

has performance standards for Fish and

Wildlife reclamation that must be met

(Wyoming rule at Chapter IV, Section

2.,(r)) and elsewhere through out

Chapter VI). The above requirements for

permit application information,

monitoring during the mining operation,

and carrying out reclamation assure that

appropriate consideration and

consultation by the agencies responsible

is obtained on a site specific basis. In

addition, the previously approved

Wyoming regulations are no less

effective than the corresponding

requirements in the Federal regulations.

The minimum data standards prepared

for the Regional Coal Teams2, while

certainly providing helpful guidelines,

are not required as part of Wyoming’s

surface coal mining program. Based on

the above discussion, the Director is not

requiring Wyoming to modify its

program in response to the BLM’s

comments (administrative record No.

WY–28–14).

3. Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) Concurrence and Comments

Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii),

OSM is required to solicit the written

concurrence of EPA with respect to

those provisions of the proposed

program amendment that relate to air or

water quality standards promulgated

under the authority of the Clean Water

Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Clean

Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.).

None of the revisions that Wyoming

proposed to make in its amendment

pertain to air or water quality standards.

Nevertheless, OSM requested EPA’s

comments on the proposed amendment

(administrative record No. WY–28–05).

EPA responded to OSM’s request on

December 21, 1994, (administrative

record No. WY–28–13) that they did not

believe there would be any impacts to

water quality standards promulgated

under the authority of the Clean Water

Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et

seq.).

4. State Historic Preservation Officer

(SHPO) and the Advisory Council on

Historic Preservation (ACHP)

Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), OSM

solicited comments on the proposed

amendment from the SHPO and the

ACHP (administrative record Nos. WY–

28–04 and WY–28–03). Neither SHPO

nor the ACHP responded to OSM’s

request.

V. Director’s Decision

Based on the above finding, the

Director approves Wyoming’s proposed

amendment as submitted on November

8, 1994, that modifies Appendix B,

Section C, concerning requirements for

survey of raptor nest status and

production success; and Appendix B,

Section E, concerning the reporting of

threatened and endangered species

when observed. The Director approves

the changes as proposed by Wyoming

with the provision that they be fully

promulgated in identical form as

submitted to and reviewed by OSM and

the public.

The Federal regulations at 30 CFR

part 950, codifying decisions concerning

the Wyoming program, are being

amended to implement this decision.

This final rule is being made effective

immediately to expedite the State

program amendment process and to

encourage States to bring their programs

into conformity with the Federal

standards without undue delay.

Consistency of State and Federal

standards is required by SMCRA.

VI. Procedural Determinations

1. Executive Order 12866

This rule is exempted from review by

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) under Executive Order 12866

(Regulatory Planning and Review).

2. Executive Order 12778

The Department of the Interior has

conducted the reviews required by

section 2 of Executive Order 12778

(Civil Justice Reform) and has

determined that this rule meets the

applicable standards of subsections (a)

and (b) of that section. However, these

standards are not applicable to the

actual language of State regulatory

programs and program amendments

since each such program is drafted and

promulgated by a specific State, not by

OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of

SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 12550) and

the Federal regulations at 30 CFR

730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),

decisions on proposed State regulatory

programs and program amendments

submitted by the States must be based

solely on a determination of whether the

submittal is consistent with SMCRA and

its implementing Federal regulations

and whether the other requirements of

30 CFR parts 730, 731, and 732 have

been met.

3. National Environmental Policy Act

No environmental impact statement is

required for this rule since section

702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d))

provides that agency decisions on
14370 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

proposed State regulatory program

provisions do not constitute major

Federal actions within the meaning of

section 102(2)(C) of the National

Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.

4332(2)(C)).

4. Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by OMB under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3507 et seq.).

5. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Department of the Interior has

determined that this rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal

that is the subject of this rule is based

upon counterpart Federal regulations for

which an economic analysis was

prepared and certification made that

such regulations would not have a

significant economic effect upon a

substantial number of small entities.

Accordingly, this rule will ensure that

existing requirements previously

promulgated by OSM will be

implemented by the State. In making the

determination as to whether this rule

would have a significant economic

impact, the Department relied upon the

data and assumptions for the

counterpart Federal regulations.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 950

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: March 10, 1995.

Charles E. Sandberg,

Acting Assistant Director, Western Support

Center.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, Title 30, Chapter VII,

Subchapter T of the Code of Federal

Regulations is amended as set forth

below:

PART 950—WYOMING

1. The authority citation for Part 950

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.

2. Section 950.15 is amended by

adding paragraph (v) to read as follows:

§ 950.15 Approval of amendments to the

Wyoming regulatory program.

* * * * *

(v) The following program changes, as

submitted to OSM on November 8,

1994, are approved effective March 17,

1995: Appendix B, Section C concerning

dates for conducting raptor surveys; and

Appendix B, Section E concerning the

reporting of observed migrating and

wintering bald eagle or migrating

peregrine falcons and observations of

other Federally listed threatened and

endangered species.

§ 950.16 [Amended]

3. Section 950.16 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraph (aa).

[FR Doc. 95–6589 Filed 3–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

POSTAL SERVICE

39 CFR Part 20

Implementation of WORLDPOST

Priority Letter

AGENCY: Postal Service.

ACTION: Interim rule with request for

comments.

SUMMARY: WORLDPOST Priority Letter

(WPL) is a new international mail

service designed for correspondence

and documents. WPL items receive

priority handling in the United States

and in destination countries. Initially,

the service will be available to 14

destination countries, from specified

post offices in seven metropolitan areas.

To use WPL, a customer must use either

of the two flat-rate envelopes designed

for this service and provided by the

Postal Service. Interim implementing

regulations have been developed and

are set forth below for comment and

suggested revision prior to adoption in

final form.

DATES: The interim regulations take

effect March 16, 1995. Comments must

be received on or before April 17, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed or delivered to International

Product Management, U.S. Postal

Service, 475 L’Enfant Plaza SW., Room

5300, Washington, DC 20260–2410.

Copies of all written comments will be

available for public inspection and

photocopying between 9 a.m. and 4

p.m., Monday through Friday, at the

above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Janet Mitchell, (202) 268–6095.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the

Universal Postal Convention,

international mail items bearing the

‘‘expre`s’’ logo receive priority handling

in destination countries. A number of

postal administrations take advantage of

that provision by offering their

customers an international mail service

that is based on, but superior to, normal

airmail service. In contrast, the only

single-piece international service the

Postal Service offers that is superior to

airmail is Express Mail International

Service (EMS), which is significantly

more expensive than airmail. In order to

provide its customers with a wider

range of international services, the

Postal Service is implementing, on a

pilot basis, WORLDPOST Priority Letter

(WPL).

WPL is an expedited airmail service

providing fast, reliable, and economical

delivery of all items mailable as letters.

Although a WPL item will travel in the

normal airmail stream between the

United States and the destination

country, the item will receive priority

handling in the United States and,

typically, in the destination country. In

the United States, after the item is

deposited, the Postal Service will

transport it in a dedicated stream to the

appropriate gateway for dispatch. Upon

arrival in the destination country, the

item will also receive priority handling.

Initially, WPL is available to the

following 14 countries: Australia,

Belgium, Canada, France, Germany,

Great Britain, Hong Kong, Japan, New

Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Sweden,

Taiwan, and The Netherlands. Based on

the Postal Service’s evaluation of WPL

performance during the pilot test, the

service may be extended to additional

destination countries.

Initially, WPL is available only from

specified ZIP Codes in the following

seven metropolitan areas: Atlanta,

Boston, Dallas/Fort Worth, Los Angeles,

Miami, New York, and Washington, DC.

The Postal Service chose these initial

acceptance sites because of their ability

to provide reliable transportation of

items deposited there to the WPL

gateways, as well as their potential to

generate significant WPL volume. Based

on the Postal Service’s evaluation of

WPL performance during the pilot test,

the service may be extended to

additional acceptance sites.

To use WPL, a customer will be

required to place the material being

mailed in either the small (5 inches by

87⁄8 inches) or large (9 inches by 111⁄2

inches) WPL envelope provided by the

Postal Service. These envelopes bear the

appropriate internationally recognized

logo for this service. In addition, their

colorful design will facilitate

recognition of the items by U.S. and

foreign postal employees, which will

help to ensure that the items receive

priority handling.

Rates are based on size (either small

or large) and destination as follows:

Destination

Envelope size

Small Large

Western Europe ................ $3.75 $6.95