Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 39 / Tuesday, February 27, 2001 / Notices 12583

11Other examples include By-Law Art. I, § 1–1

(defining lessor and lessee); By-Law Art. XII, § 12–

1 (a member conducts business on the Exchange);

By-Law Art. XII, § 12–8 (authorizing lessor

application fee, lessor initiation fee, and fees upon

transfer of equitable title); By-Law Art. XIV, §§ 14–

1, 14–2, 14–5 (the Exchange can impose charges on

members, including penalties for non-payment of

fees); By-Law Art. XV, § 15–1 (the Exchange

approves lessees); Rule 931 (the Exchange approves

lessors); Rule 960.1 et seq. (the Exchange may

discipline members).

12 15 U.S.C. 78f.

13 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).

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

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

16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

17 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

lessors and lessees are lawful because,

under the terms of its relationships with

both lessors and lessees, the Exchange

has the right to adopt by-laws, rules, or

regulations that affect those lessors and

lessees. Pennsylvania law holds that a

contracting party may lawfully exercise

its own contractual rights against

another party to the contract, even if

doing so interferes with the terms of a

separate agreement of the other party.

Here, the potential suspension or

termination of a lease agreement in

accordance with the rules of the

Exchange is permissible under the terms

of the Exchange’s separate agreements

with each of the parties to the lease

agreement.

Both lessors and lessees (as members)

agree respectively as a condition of

approval of the right to lease seats and

as a condition of approval for

membership that the Exchange may

effectuate changes to their lease

agreements, including termination. As a

condition of the right to lease their

seats, lessors agree ‘‘to abide by the

[Exchange’s] By-Laws as they have or

shall be from time to time amended, and

by all rules and regulations adopted

pursuant to the By-Laws.’’ See By-Law

Art. XII, § 12–9(b). Lessees (as members)

likewise make the same commitment.

See id. at 12–9(a). By agreeing to abide

by future by-laws, rules, and

regulations, lessors and lessees

necessarily grant permission to the

Exchange to adopt rules pursuant to

which their lease agreements may be

suspended or terminated. Indeed, the

Exchange has already repeatedly

exercised its right to adopt rules and bylaws directly impacting lessors and

lessees in a variety of rules, including

Rule 930, which closely regulates the

terms and conditions of lease

agreements.11 Accordingly, Article

Nineteenth, which would provide in

express form the authorization for the

adoption of rules suspending or

terminating lease agreements, would

simply authorize that which is

countenanced by the terms of the

Exchange’s existing relationship with

lessors and lessees, and is thereby

permissible as a matter of Pennsylvania

contract law.

Thus, the Exchange believes that

proposed Article Nineteenth was

properly adopted by the Exchange

Board under Delaware law and is

permissible as a matter of Pennsylvania

contract law.

III. Discussion

After careful consideration, the

Commission finds that the proposed

rule change is consistent with the

requirements of section 6 of the Act 12

and the rules and regulations

thereunder applicable to a national

securities exchange.13 In particular, the

Commission finds the proposed rule

change is consistent with section 6(b)(5)

of the Act,14 in that it promotes just and

equitable principles of trade and

protects investors and the public

interest.

The Phlx represented that it needs

Article Nineteenth in order to give the

Board the express authorization to adopt

specific rules relating to the leasing of

memberships, including suspending or

terminating lease agreements. The

Commission finds that the proposed

rule change promotes just and equitable

principles of trade and protects

investors and the public interest

because it enables the Board to

determine whether, and under what

terms and conditions, memberships can

be leased. Furthermore, the Phlx

acknowledges that any such rules or

resolutions, which are adopted by the

Board under Article Nineteenth, shall be

filed with the Commission to the extent

required pursuant to section 19(b) of the

Act.15

The Commission is not required

under section 19(b)(2) of the Act to find

that a proposed rule change by a selfregulatory organization is lawful under

state law. In approving this proposal,

the Commission is relying on the Phlx’s

representation that it has the general

power under applicable provisions of

Delaware corporate law to adopt Article

Nineteeth without the approval of

members, or by owners, lessors, or

lessees of memberships. Furthermore,

the Commission is also relying on the

Phlx’s representation that, under the

applicable powers of Pennsylvania

contract law, the Phlx has the right to

adopt by-laws, rules, or regulation that

affect those lessors and lessees

contractual relationships. The

Commission has not independently

evaluated the accuracy of Phlx’s

representations about Delaware or

Pennsylvania law.

Thus, the Commission finds that the

proposed rule change is consistent with

the Act.

IV. Conclusion

It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to

section 19(b)(2) of the Act,16 that the

proposed rule change (SR–Phlx–99–50),

and Amendment No. 1 thereto, are

approved.

By the Commission, for the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.17

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–4754 Filed 2–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

Environmental Impact Statement:

Klickitat and Skamania Counties,

Washington and Hood River County,

Oregon

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Intent.

SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this

notice to advise the public that an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

will be prepared for a proposed new

Columbia River crossing project in

Klickitat County or Skamania County,

Washington and Hood River County,

Oregon. Northern and southern termini

for the new crossing would be located

in or near the cities of White Salmon

and Bingen, Washington, and Hood

River, Oregon.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael Kulbacki, Transportation and

Environmental Engineer, Federal

Highway Administration, 711 S. Capitol

Way, Suite 501, Olympia, WA 98501,

Telephone: 360–753–9556; or Dale

Robins, Project Manager, Southwest

Washington Regional Transportation

Council, 1351 Officers Row, Vancouver,

WA 98661, Telephone: 360–397–6067.

Additional information can also be

obtained at the project web site:

http:www.rtc.wa.gov/studies/sr35.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

FHWA, in cooperation with the

Washington State Department of

Transportation, the Southwest

Washington Regional Transportation

Council, and the Oregon Department of

Transportation, will prepare an EIS on

12584 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 39 / Tuesday, February 27, 2001 / Notices

a proposal to establish a new or

improved transportation crossing of the

Columbia River. This crossing will

involve either existing facility

improvements or new connections

between SR 14 in Washington to SR 35

and/or I–84 in Oregon. The Washington

State Department of Transportation has

designated this proposed crossing as

State Route 35 (SR–35).

A new or improved Columbia River

crossing is necessary to effectively

accommodate current and future traffic

demands, address multi-modal

accessibility, enhance movement of

freight and other goods, improve public

safety, and improve current and future

traffic operations.

Alternatives under consideration

include (1) no action; (2) multi-modal

options; (3) improvements to traffic and

toll operations, (4) improvements to the

existing bridge; and (5) constructing a

new bridge or tunnel at or near the

existing location. Potential crossing

corridors being evaluated along the

Columbia River include: West Hood

River I–84 interchange, Second Street in

Hood River (using the City Center exit

on I–84), the existing bridge crossing,

and east of Hood River near Stanley

Rock. Design variations being evaluated

include adjustments to grade,

alignment, and crossing type.

A series of preliminary meetings have

already been conducted between

various public groups, the project

Steering Committee, a Local Advisory

Committee, and a Resource and

Regulatory agency Committee since this

project has been introduced. The ideas

presented at these meetings will be

incorporated into the environmental

process as will all the necessary impacts

and alternatives required by the

National Environmental Protection Act

(NEPA) and Council on Environmental

Quality (CEQ) regulations.

Letters soliciting comments will be

sent to appropriate Federal, State, and

Local agencies, including private

organizations and citizens who have

previously expressed or are known to

have interest in this proposal.

A public scoping meeting will be held

on March 8, 2001, from 5 to 8 p.m. at

Fidel’s at the Gorge (restaurant), located

on SR 14 at 120 East Steuben in Bingen,

Washington. On March 8, 2001, a

resource and regulatory agency scoping

meeting will be held in Troutdale,

Oregon, at the Oregon Department of

Transportation Maintenance Facility

from 1:30 to 3:00 p.m. Notification of

the public scoping meeting will be

published in the local newspaper and

through mailed announcements.

In addition, a public meeting will be

held prior to completion of the draft

EIS. Public notice will be given of the

time and place of all proposed meetings

during Draft and Final EIS development.

The draft EIS will be made available to

the public and all agencies for review

and comment prior to all public

meetings.

Interested parties are encouraged to

provide suggestions and comments in

order to ensure that the full range of

issues related to this proposed action

are addressed and all potential impacts

identified. Comments or questions

concerning this proposed action and the

EIS should be directed to the FHWA,

Washington Division or Southwest

Washington Regional Transportation

Council at the addresses or telephone

numbers provided in the Contact

Information Section.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning

and Construction. The regulations

implementing Executive Order 12372

regarding intergovernmental consultation on

Federal programs and activities apply to this

program)

Issued on: February 14, 2001.

Michael Kulbacki,

Transportation and Environmental Engineer,

Olympia, Washington.

[FR Doc. 01–4706 Filed 2–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

Environmental Impact Statement:

Mendocino County, California

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Intent.

SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this

notice to advise the public that an

environmental impact statement will be

prepared for a proposed highway project

in Mendocino County, near the town of

Hopland, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: C.

Glenn Clinton, Team Leader, Program

Delivery Team—North, Federal

Highway Administration, 980 Ninth

Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, California

95814–2724, Telephone: 916–498–5020.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

FHWA, in cooperation with the

California Department of Transportation

(Caltrans), will prepare an

environmental impact statement (EIS)

on a proposed project to construct a four

lane freeway or expressway bypass of

the community of Hopland, on Route

101 in Southern Mendocino County.

The project limits extend from kp 14.2

to 22.5 (pm 8.8 to 14.0). The project is

needed to reduce operational conflicts,

accommodate existing and future traffic

demand, reduce travel time, increase

safety, improve air quality, reduce noise

in Hopland and provide the facility

concept identified in the ‘‘Inter-regional

Transportation Strategic Plan’’.

Three aligments are being proposed at

this time as well as a ‘‘No Build’’

alternative. All of the alignments

potentially affect oak woodlands,

riparian forest and pre-historic cultural

resources. A Public Open House has

been held to solicit opinions from the

community and a Project Development

Team has been formed to determine the

scope of the project. There will be a

public scoping meeting to discuss the

proposed project and another

opportunity for public comment on the

draft environmental document during

the circulation phase of the draft

environmental impact statement (DEIS).

To ensure that the full range of issues

related to this proposed action is

addressed and all significant issues

identified, comments and suggestions

are invited from all interested parties.

The views of agencies that may have

interest in the effect of the proposal on

historic properties are specifically

solicited. Comments or questions

concerning this proposed action and the

EIS should be directed to the FHWA at

the address provided above.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program Number 20.205, Highway Research,

Planning and Construction. The regulations

implementing Executive Order 12372

regarding intergovernmental consultation on

Federal programs and activities apply to this

program)

Issued on February 15, 2001.

C. Glenn Clinton,

Team Leader, Program Delivery Team—

North, Sacramento, California.

[FR Doc. 01–4705 Filed 2–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Maritime Administration

[Docket Number: MARAD–2001–8952]

Requested Administrative Waiver of

the Coastwise Trade Laws

AGENCY: Maritime Administration,

Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Invitation for public comments

on a requested administrative waiver of

the Coastwise Trade Laws for the vessel

CHARISMA.

SUMMARY: As authorized by Public Law

105–383, the Secretary of

Transportation, as represented by the

Maritime Administration (MARAD), is