25248 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 98 / Monday, May 20, 1996 / Notices

Any inquiries regarding this notice or

any subsequent changes in the status

and schedule of the meeting, may be

made to the Designated Federal Officer,

Dr. Jose Luis M. Cortez (telephone: 301–

415–6596), between 8:15 am and 5:00

pm.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 14th day

of May, 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Andrew L. Bates,

Federal Advisory Committee Management

Officer.

[FR Doc. 96–12611 Filed 5–17–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available

From: Securities and Exchange

Commission, Office of Filings and

Information Services, Washington,

DC 20549

Extension: Rule 17a–13 SEC File No.

270–27 OMB Control No. 3235–

0035

Notice is hereby given that pursuant

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities

and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the

Office of Management and Budget a

request for approval of extension on the

following rule:

Rule 17a–13(b) requires that at least

once each calendar quarter, brokers and

dealers physically examine and count

all securities held and account for all

other securities not in their possession,

but subject to the broker-dealer’s control

or direction. Any discrepancies between

the broker-dealer’s securities count and

the firm’s records must be noted and,

within seven days, the unaccounted for

difference must be recorded in the

firm’s records. Rule 17a–13(c) provides

that under specified conditions, the

securities count, examination and

verification of the broker-dealer’s entire

list of securities may be conducted on

a cyclical basis rather than on a certain

date. Although Rule 17a–13 does not

require filing a report with the

Commission, the discrepancies must be

reported on the form required by Rule

17a–5.

The information obtained from Rule

17a–13 is used as an inventory control

device to monitor a broker-dealer’s

ability to account for all securities held,

in transfer, in transit, pledged, loaned,

borrowed, deposited or otherwise

subject to the firm’s control or direction.

Discrepancies between the securities

counts and the broker-dealer’s records

alert the Commission and the Self

Regulatory Organizations (‘‘SROs’’) to

those firms having problems in their

back offices.

Because of the many variations in the

amount of securities that broker-dealers

are accountable for, it is difficult to

develop a meaningful figure for the cost

of compliance with Rule 17a–13. About

fifteen percent of all registered brokers

and dealers are exempt from Rule 17a–

13. Another significant amount of firms

have minimal obligations under the rule

because they hold, or are owed few

securities. The average amount of time

consumed by complying with Rule 17a–

13 is approximately 100 hours per year.

It should be noted that most brokerdealers would engage in the activities

required by Rule 17a–13 even if they

were not required to do so.

General comments regarding the

estimated burden hours should be

directed to the Desk Officer for the

Securities and Exchange Commission at

the address below. Any comments

concerning the accuracy of the

estimated average burden hours for

compliance with Commission rules and

forms should be directed to Michael E.

Bartell, Associate Executive Director,

Office of Information Technology,

Securities and Exchange Commission,

450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, D.C.

20549 and Desk Officer for the

Securities and Exchange Commission,

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, Room 3208, New Executive

Office Building, Washington, D.C.

20503.

Dated: May 13, 1996.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–12597 Filed 5–17–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Rel. No. IC–21959; International Series

Release No. 980; File No. 812–10090]

The Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. and

Chemical Bank; Notice of Application

May 14, 1996.

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange

Commission (‘‘SEC’’).

ACTION: Notice of application for

exemption under the Investment

Company Act of 1940 (the ‘‘Act’’).

APPLICANTS: The Chase Manhattan Bank,

N.A. (‘‘Chase’’) and Chemical Bank

(‘‘Chemical’’).

RELEVANT ACT SECTIONS: Order requested

under section 6(c) of the Act for an

exemption from section 17(f) of the Act.

SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicants

request an order that would amend

three prior orders granted to Chase that

permit Chase subsidiaries in Malaysia,

Mexico, and Russia to maintain in those

countries certain assets of U.S.

registered investment companies. The

requested order would substitute the

entity surviving the anticipated merger

of Chase and Chemical as the party to

which relief is granted. Chemical will

survive the merger and change its name

to ‘‘The Chase Manhattan Bank.’’

FILING DATE: The application was filed

on April 18, 1996.

HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An

order granting the application will be

issued unless the SEC orders a hearing.

Interested persons may request a

hearing by writing to the SEC’s

Secretary and serving applicants with a

copy of the request, personally or by

mail. Hearing requests should be

received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on

June 10, 1996 by proof of service on

applicants, in the form of an affidavit or,

for lawyers, a certificate of service.

Hearing requests should state the nature

of the writer’s interest, the reason for the

request, and the issues contested.

Persons who wish to be notified of a

hearing may request notification by

writing to the SEC’s Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, SEC, 450 Fifth

Street NW., Washington, D.C. 20549.

Applicants, c/o Daniel L. Goelzer, Esq.,

Baker & McKenzie, 815 Connecticut

Avenue NW., Washington, D.C. 20006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Deepak T. Pai, Staff Attorney, at (202)

942–0574, or David M. Goldenberg,

Branch Chief, at (202) 942–0564

(Division of Investment Management,

Office of Investment Company

Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

following is a summary of the

application. The complete application

may be obtained for a fee at the SEC’s

Public Reference Branch.

Applicants’ Representations

1. Chase is a national banking

association, regulated by the

Comptroller of the Currency under the

National Bank Act. At December 31,

1995, Chase had shareholders’ equity in

excess of $8.065 billion. Through its

Global Securities Services division,

Chase provides custody and related

services to global institutional investors,

including U.S. registered investment

companies.

2. Chemical Bank is a banking

institution, organized under the laws of

the State of New York. It is regulated as

a bank by the Superintendent of Banks

of New York, and is a member bank of
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 98 / Monday, May 20, 1996 / Notices 25249

1Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., (‘‘ChaseMalaysia’’), Investment Company Act Release Nos.

20647 (Oct. 21, 1994) (notice) and 20706 (Nov. 15,

1994) (order); Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.,

(‘‘Chase-Mexico’’), Investment Company Act

Release Nos. 20694 (Nov. 9, 1994) (notice) and

20753 (Dec. 5, 1994) (order); and Chase Manhattan

Bank, N.A., (‘‘Chase-Russia’’), Investment Company

Act Release Nos. 20969 (Mar. 28, 1995) (notice) and

21101 (May 31, 1995) (order).

2The Prior Orders define ‘‘assets’’ to include

foreign securities, cash, and cash equivalents.

‘‘Foreign securities’’ include securities issued and

sold primarily outside the U.S. by a foreign

government, a national of any foreign country, or

a corporation or other organization incorporated or

organized under the laws of any foreign country,

and securities issued or guaranteed by the

government of the U.S. or by any state or any

political subdivision thereof or by any agency

thereof or by any entity organized under the laws

of the U.S. or of any state thereof which have been

issued and sold primarily outside the U.S.

the Federal Reserve System. At

December 31, 1995, Chemical had

shareholders’ equity in excess of $8.18

billion. Through its Geoserve Securities

Services division, Chemical provides

custody and related services to global

institutional investors, including U.S.

registered investment companies.

3. On March 31, 1996, Chase’s parent

holding company, The Chase Manhattan

Corporation, and Chemical’s parent

holding company, Chemical Banking

Corporation, merged. Chemical Banking

Corporation was the surviving entity in

the merger, and it has changed its name

to ‘‘The Chase Manhattan Corporation.’’

During July 1996, it is anticipated that

Chase will be merged into Chemical (the

‘‘Merger’’). Chemical will survive the

Merger, and will change its name to

‘‘The Chase Manhattan Bank’’ (New

Chase’’).

4. Chase-Malaysia, Chase-Mexico, and

Chase-Russia (the ‘‘Foreign

Subsidiaries’’) each are indirect

subsidiaries of Chase and, after the

Merger, each will become an indirect

subsidiary of New Chase. Applicants

state that, upon the Merger, New Chase

will succeed by operation of law to the

rights and obligations of Chase,

including Chase’s obligations under

various custody agreements with certain

U.S. registered investment companies

and under subcustody agreements with

each of the three Foreign Subsidiaries.

5. Applicants request an order under

section 6(c) for an exemption from

section 17(f) that would amend three

orders previously granted to Chase (the

‘‘Prior Orders’’) 1 that permit Chase, and

Chase’s subsidiaries in Malaysia,

Mexico, and Russia to provide certain

foreign custody arrangements in those

countries for the assets of investment

companies registered under the Act,

other than investment companies

registered under section 7(d) of the Act

(‘‘U.S. Investment Companies’’).2

Applicants request that New chase be

substituted for Chase under the Prior

Orders. The amendment will permit

New Chase and its subsidiaries in

Malaysia, Mexico,and Russia to

continue to provide custody services in

those jurisdictions to U.S. Investment

Companies under the same terms and

conditions as are set forth in the Prior

Orders.

6. Each Prior Order requires, among

other conditions, that Chase have in

place two bilateral contractual

arrangements, consisting of a Custody

Agreement between Chase and the U.S.

Investment Company (or its custodian),

and a Subcustody Agreement between

Chase and the applicable Foreign

Subsidiary. Under the Custody

Agreement, Chase undertakes to provide

custody or subcustody services, and

agrees to delegate certain of its duties

and obligations as custodian to the

Foreign Subsidiary. The Custody

Agreement further provides that the

delegation by Chase to the Foreign

Subsidiary does not relieve Chase of any

responsibility to the U.S. Investment

Company or its custodian for any loss

due to such delegation, and that Chase

will be liable for any loss or claim

arising out of or in connection with the

performance by the Foreign Subsidiary

of the custody services to the same

extent as if Chase had itself provided

the custody services under the Custody

Agreement.

7. Under each Subcustody Agreement,

Chase delegates to Chase-Malaysia,

Chase-Mexico, and Chase-Russia,

respectively, such of Chase’s duties and

obligations as would be necessary to

permit the Foreign Subsidiary to hold

assets in custody in Malaysia, Mexico,

and Russia, respectively. Each

Subcustody Agreement explicitly

provides that (a) the Foreign Subsidiary

is acting as a foreign custodian for assets

that belong to a U.S. Investment

Company pursuant to the terms of an

exemptive order issued by the SEC and

(b) the U.S. Investment Company or its

custodian (as the case may be) that has

entered into a Custody Agreement is

entitled to enforce the terms of the

Subcustody Agreement and can seek

relief directly against the Foreign

Subsidiary. Finally, each Subcustody

Agreement provides that it is governed

by New York law.

Applicants’ Legal Conclusions

1. Section 17(f) of the Act requires

every registered management

investment company to place and

maintain its securities and similar

investments in the custody of certain

entities, including ‘‘banks’’ having

aggregate capital, surplus, and

undivided profits of at least $500,000. A

‘‘bank,’’ as defined in section 2(a)(5) of

the Act, includes (a) a banking

institution organized under the laws of

the United States; (b) a member of the

Federal Reserve System; and (c) any

other banking institution or trust

company doing business under the laws

of any State or of the United States, and

meeting certain requirements.

Therefore, the only entities located

outside the United States which section

17(f) authorizes to serve as custodians

for registered management investment

companies are the overseas branches of

U.S. banks.

2. Rule 17f–5 under the Act expands

the group of entities that are permitted

to serve as foreign custodians. Rule 17f–

5(c)(2)(ii) defines the term ‘‘Eligible

Foreign Custodian’’ to include a

majority-owned direct or indirect

subsidiary of a qualified U.S. bank or

bank holding company that is

incorporated or organized under the

laws of a country other than the United

States and that has shareholders’ equity

in excess of $100 million. Rule 17f–

5(c)(3) defines the term ‘‘Qualified U.S.

Bank’’ to include a banking institution

organized under the laws of the United

States or a member bank of the Federal

Reserve System that has an aggregate

capital, surplus, and undivided profit of

not less than $500,000.

3. Chase is a Qualified U.S. Bank as

defined in rule 17f–5, since it is a

national bank and has aggregate capital,

surplus, and undivided profits

substantially in excess of the $500,000

minimum required by the rule.

Chemical is a Qualified U.S. Bank under

rule 17f–5, since it is a member of the

Federal Reserve System and has capital

substantially in excess of the $500,000

minimum. New Chase will also be a

Qualified U.S. Bank after the Merger.

The Foreign Subsidiaries are not U.S.

banks and are not eligible foreign

custodians, because each lacks the

required $100 million in shareholders’

equity, although each satisfies the other

requirements for eligibility under rule

17f–5.

4. Section 6(c) of the Act provides, in

relevant part, that the SEC may exempt

any person or class of persons from any

provision of the Act or from any rule

thereunder, if such exemption is

necessary or appropriate in the public

interest, consistent with the protection

of investors, and consistent with the

purposes fairly intended by the policy

and provisions of the Act.

5. Applicants believe that the

requested amendment is necessary and

appropriate in the public interest to

permit U.S. Investment Companies for

which Chase serves as custodian or
25250 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 98 / Monday, May 20, 1996 / Notices

subcustodian to continue to use the

arrangements currently in place under

the Prior Orders after the Merger, and to

permit new U.S. Investment Company

customers for which New Chase may

serve in such capacities to have access

to such arrangements. Applicants

contend that requiring current U.S.

Investment Company customers of

Chase to bear the substantial expense

and effort of implementing alternative

arrangements merely because of the

Merger would be contrary to the best

interests of investors and public policy.

Absent an amendment, New Chase

would be unable to offer these services

in Malaysia, Mexico, and Russia to such

U.S. Investment Companies under the

Prior Orders.

6. Applicants believe that the assets to

which the Prior Orders relate will be as

effectively protected by New Chase as

they have been by Chase. Following the

Merger, New Chase will be required to

assume liability under the ChaseMalaysia, Chase-Mexico, and ChaseRussia orders, to the same extent that

Chase is required to do so under these

orders. Applicants state that this

application does not seek to change in

any manner the terms and protections

applicable to U.S. Investment Company

assets held in custody by the Foreign

Subsidiaries.

7. Applicants state that the purpose of

section 17(f) is to ensure that U.S.

Investment Companies hold securities

in a safe manner that protects the

interests of their shareholders. The

purpose of rule 17f–5 is to relieve U.S.

Investment Companies of the expense

and inconvenience of transferring assets

to the custody of a U.S. bank or other

qualified custodian outside the

jurisdiction in which the primary

trading market for those assets is located

and to reduce the risks inherent in

maintaining assets outside the United

States. Applicants state that the

requested amendment would permit

New Chase to continue offering custody

services in Malaysia, Mexico, and

Russia under the same terms and

conditions as set forth in the Prior

Orders and is, therefore, consistent with

these purposes.

8. Applicants state that in granting the

Prior Orders, the SEC determined that

the arrangements which those orders

permit satisfy the standards of section

6(c). Applicants believe that the

substitution of New Chase for Chase as

the party to which the terms and

conditions of those orders apply in no

way detracts from the continuing

validity of the SEC’s determinations.

Therefore, applicants believe the

requested order satisfies these

standards.

Condition

Applicants agree that the order

granting the requested relief shall be

subject to the condition that, following

the merger of Chase and Chemical, New

Chase will comply with all of the terms

and conditions set forth in the existing

orders as if such orders had been

granted to New Chase.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Investment Management, under delegated

authority.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–12595 Filed 5–17–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[File No. 1–7316]

Issuer Delisting; Notice of Application

To Withdraw From Listing and

Registration; (Commonwealth Energy

System, Common Shares of Beneficial

Interest, $4 Par Value)

May 14, 1996.

Commonwealth Energy System

(‘‘Company’’ or ‘‘System’’) has filed an

application with the Securities and

Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’),

pursuant to Section 12(d) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’)

and Rule 12d2–2(d) promulgated

thereunder, to withdraw the above

specified security (‘‘Security’’) from

listing and registration on the Boston

Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BSE’’).

The reasons alleged in the application

for withdrawing the security from

listing and registration include the

following:

According to the Company, the

Exchange charges the System an annual

maintenance fee of $1,000 and listing

fees for additional registered shares. The

low volume of System shares traded on

the BSE does not warrant continued

listing on this exchange. Additionally,

the System believes that its shareholders

receive no significant economic benefit

by maintaining its listing with the

exchange. The System further believes

that its continued listing on the NYSE

and the PSE is sufficient to serve the

needs of its shareholders throughout the

continental United States and its

political sub-division thereof.

Any interested person may, on or

before June 5, 1996, submit by letter to

the Secretary of the Securities and

Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street

NW., Washington, DC, 20549, facts

bearing upon whether the application

has been made in accordance with the

rules of the exchanges and what terms,

if any, should be imposed by the

Commission for the protection of

investors. The Commission, based on

the information submitted to it, will

issue an order granting the application

after the date mentioned above, unless

the Commission determines to order a

hearing on the matter.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.

Jonathan G. Katz,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–12538 Filed 5–17–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[File No. 1–10751]

Issuer Delisting; Notice of Application

To Withdraw From Listing and

Registration; (Star Multi Care Services,

Inc., Common Stock, $0.001 Par Value)

May 14, 1996.

Star Multi Care Services, Inc.

(‘‘Company’’) has filed an application

with the Securities and Exchange

Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant

to Section 12(d) of the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) and Rule

12d2–2(d) promulgated thereunder, to

withdraw the above specified security

(‘‘Security’’) from listing and

registration on the Pacific Stock

Exchange, Inc. (‘‘PSE’’).

The reasons alleged in the application

for withdrawing the Security from

listing and registration include the

following:

According to the Company, since

October 16, 1995 it has been listed on

the Nasdaq National Market (‘‘NMS’’).

In making the decision to withdraw

its Security from listing on the PSE, the

Company considered the direct and

indirect costs and expenses attendant on

maintaining the dual listing of its

Security on the PSE and the NMS. The

Company does not see any particular

advantage in the dual trading of its

Security and believes that dual listing

would fragment the market for its

Security.

Any interested person may, on or

before June 5, 1996 submit by letter to

the Secretary of the Securities and

Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street,

N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549, facts

bearing upon whether the application

has been made in accordance with the

rules of the exchanges and what terms,

if any, should be imposed by the

Commission for the protection of

investors. The Commission, based on

the information submitted to it, will

issue an order granting the application

after the date mentioned above, unless

the Commission determines to order a

hearing on the matter.