Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2005-08-11 · NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION · Notices

Notices. Notice of an application for an order under sections 6(c) and 6(e) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) granting relief from all provisions of the Act, except sections 37 through 53 of the Act and the rules and regulations under those sections, other than rule 38a-1

9,989 words·~45 min read·/register/2005/08/11/05-15963·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 6820-MA-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364] Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC)is considering issuance of an exemption from title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, Appendix R, “Fire Protection Program for Nuclear Power Facilities Operating Prior to January 1, 1979,” Section III.G.2.c, for Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8, issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC or the licensee), for operation of the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Power Plant (FNP), Units 1 and 2, located in Houston County, Alabama. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. Environmental Assessment *Identification of the Proposed Action:* On December 29, 1986, the NRC staff granted Exemption Request 1-3, “Service Water Intake Structure—Fire Area 72,” from certain requirements of Appendix R, Section III.G.2.c, that require fire detection and fire suppression capabilities and the enclosure of cables, equipment, and associated non-safety circuits of one redundant train of safe shutdown equipment in a one-hour rated fire barrier. Exemption Request 1-3, issued on December 29, 1986, listed a total of ten items specific to Fire Area 72 for the Service Water Intake Structure (SWIS), which is common to FNP, Units 1 and 2. By letters dated August 28, 2003, December 28, 2004, and June 9, 2005, SNC submitted proposed revisions to Exemption Request 1-3. SNC stated that the proposed revisions to Exemption Request 1-3 would clarify FNP's fire protection licensing basis, delete unnecessary attributes of the prior approved exemption, and revise the remaining exemption attributes to remove references to the Kaowool one-hour fire barrier material. SNC also stated that the proposed revision to Exemption Request 1-3 is part of SNC's comprehensive plan to respond to concerns about Kaowool fire barrier material. SNC's August 28, 2003, letter provided the disposition for the original ten items plus one additional item related to Exemption Request 1-3. For two of these items, no change in the basis for their inclusion as exemption items was proposed and they were not considered further. For two of the items related to the service water swing pump cables, the principal basis for their inclusion as exemption items was not changed, however an improvement in defense-in-depth due the upgrading of certain walls within the SWIS to 3-hour rated fire barriers was recognized. For two of the items related to the service water header strainer motor operated inlet valves and swing pump motor operated discharge valves, the basis for the exemption is revised to delete reliance on Kaowool and to reflect the re-analysis that shows that damage to cables in the strainer pit cannot result in spurious operation of the valves. For the discharge-to-wet pit and discharge to storage pond flume valves, SNC showed that, based on deterministic and fire modeling results, that fire effects will not result in the mis-positioning of the valves. For the item related to service water pump cables in Fire Area 72 A, an integrated risk assessment shows that safe shutdown can be achieved even if no credit is taken for the Kaowool raceway enclosures. A previously existing Exemption Request 1-3 item relating to the coordination between safe shutdown and non-safe shutdown circuits was found to have been resolved by modifications to the plant and, accordingly, is deleted from Exemption Request 1-3. For the item related to the redundant Train A and Train B service water and related power cables that enter the SWIS near the ceiling in the northeast corner, an integrated risk assessment shows that fire damage would not occur to these cables even if no credit were taken for Kaowool. The proposed action, would allow SNC to re-establish the basis for Exemption Request 1-3 based on programmatic and plant design modifications, a deterministic re-analyses of fire protection considerations, a risk-informed plant change evaluation specifically applicable to the SWIS, enhanced controls on transient combustibles, the existing fire detection and automatic fire suppression capability to maintain defense-in-depth, and the availability of manual fire fighting and associated fire fighting equipment. *The Need for the Proposed Action:* The proposed changes to Exemption Request 1-3 from 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.2.c is needed to enable SNC to re-establish the bases for the exemption that do not rely on the use of the Kaowool fire barrier material for the enclosure of certain redundant cable trays in the SWIS Fire Area 72. *Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:* The NRC has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the proposed changes to Exemption Request 1-3 will not present an undue risk to the public health and safety. The details of the NRC staff's Safety Evaluation will be provided in the revised Exemption Request 1-3 that will be issued in a letter to the licensee approving the changes to Exemption Request 1-3. The action relates to revising the bases for the adequacy of the fire protection program at FNP. The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. *Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action:* As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action ( *i.e.* , the “no-action” alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar. *Alternative Use of Resources:* The action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of the FNP, Units 1 and 2, dated December 1974, and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (NUREG-1437, Supplement 18), dated March, 2005. *Agencies and Persons Consulted:* In accordance with its stated policy, on August 4, 2005, the NRC staff consulted with the Alabama State official, David Walters, of the Office of Radiation Control, Alabama Department of Public Health, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letters dated August 28, 2003, December 28, 2004, and June 9, 2005. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html* . Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov* . Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of August 2005. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Robert E. Martin, Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-4351 Filed 8-10-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Investment Company Act Release No. 27026 ; 812-13183] WNC Housing Tax Credit Fund VI, L.P., Series 13 and Series 14, and WNC National Partners, LLC; Notice of Application August 4, 2005. AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”). ACTION: Notice of an application for an order under sections 6(c) and 6(e) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) granting relief from all provisions of the Act, except sections 37 through 53 of the Act and the rules and regulations under those sections, other than rule 38a-1. *Applicants:* WNC Housing Tax Credit Fund VI, L.P., Series 13 and WNC Housing Tax Credit Fund VI, L.P., Series 14 (each a “Series,” and collectively, the “Fund”), and WNC National Partners, LLC (the “General Partner”). *Summary of the Application:* Applicants request an order to permit each Series to invest in limited partnerships that engage in the ownership and operation of apartment complexes for low and moderate income persons. DATES: The application was filed on April 18, 2005, and amended on July 22, 2005. *Hearing or Notification of Hearing:* An order granting the application will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on August 29, 2005, and should be accompanied 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 may request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary. ADDRESSES: Secretary, Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. Applicants, 17782 Sky Park Circle, Irvine, California 92614. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bruce R. MacNeil, Senior Counsel,
(202)551-6817, or Mary Kay Frech, Branch Chief,
(202)551-6821 (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 from the Commission's Public Reference Branch, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-0102 (telephone
(202)551-5850). Applicants' Representations 1. Each Series was formed in 2005 as a California limited partnership. Each Series will operate as a “two-tier” partnership, i.e., each Series will invest as a limited partner in other limited partnerships (“Local Limited Partnerships”). The Local Limited Partnerships in turn will engage in the ownership and operation of apartment complexes expected to be qualified for low income housing tax credit under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. The General Partner is a California limited liability company whose sole member is WNC & Associates, Inc. (“WNC & Associates”), a California corporation. 2. The objectives of each Series are
(a)to provide current tax benefits primarily in the form of low income housing credits which investors may use to offset their Federal income tax liabilities,
(b)to preserve and protect capital, and
(c)to provide cash distributions from sale or refinancing transactions. 3. On April 18, 2005, the Fund filed a registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933, pursuant to which the Fund intends to offer publicly, in two series of offerings, 25,000 units of limited partnership interest (“Units”) at $1,000 per Unit. The minimum investment will be five Units for most investors, although employees of the General Partner and/or its affiliates and/or investors in syndications previously sponsored by the General Partner and/or its affiliates may purchase a minimum of two Units. Purchasers of the Units will become limited partners (“Limited Partners”) of the Series offering the Units. 4. A Series will not accept any subscriptions for Units until the requested exemptive order is granted or the Series receives an opinion of counsel that it is exempt from registration under the Act. Subscriptions for Units must be approved by the General Partner. Such approval will be conditioned upon representations as to suitability of the investment for each subscriber. The suitability standards provide, among other things, that investment in a Series is suitable only for an investor who either
(a)has a net worth (exclusive of home, furnishings, and automobiles), of at least $35,000 and an annual gross income of at least $35,000, or
(b)irrespective of annual income, has a net worth (exclusive of home, furnishings, and automobiles) of at least $75,000. Units will be sold only to investors who meet these suitability standards, or such more restrictive suitability standards as may be established by certain states for purchasers of Units within their respective jurisdictions. In addition, transfers of Units will be permitted only if the transferee meets the same suitability standards as had been imposed on the transferor Limited Partner. 5. Although a Series' direct control over the management of each apartment complex will be limited, the Series' ownership of interests in Local Limited Partnerships will, in an economic sense, be tantamount to direct ownership of the apartment complexes themselves. A Series normally will acquire at least a 90% interest in the profits, losses, and tax credits of the Local Limited Partnerships. However, in certain cases, the Series may acquire a lesser interest in such partnerships. Each Local Limited Partnership's partnership agreement will provide that distributions of proceeds from a sale or refinancing of an apartment complex will be paid to a Series in the range of from 10% to 50%. 6. Each Series will have certain voting rights with respect to each Local Limited Partnership. The voting rights will include the right to dismiss and replace the local general partner on the basis of performance, to approve or disapprove a sale or refinancing of the apartment complex owned by such Local Limited Partnership, to approve or disapprove the dissolution of the Local Limited Partnership, and to approve or disapprove amendments to the Local Limited Partnership agreement materially and adversely affecting the Series' investment. 7. Each Series will be controlled by the General Partner, pursuant to a partnership agreement (the “Partnership Agreement”). The Limited Partners, consistent with their limited liability status, will not be entitled to participate in the control of the business of the Series. However, a majority-in-interest of the Limited Partners will have the right to amend the Partnership Agreement (subject to certain limitations), to remove any General Partner and elect a replacement, and to dissolve the Series. In addition, under the Partnership Agreement, each Limited Partner is entitled to review all books and records of the Series. 8. Applicants state that the Partnership Agreement and prospectus of the Series contain provisions designed to ensure fair dealing by the General Partner with the Limited Partners. Applicants also state that all compensation to be paid to the General Partner and its affiliates is specified in the Partnership Agreement and prospectus. Applicants believe that the fees and other forms of compensation that will be paid to the General Partner and its affiliates are fair and on terms no less favorable to the Series than would be the case if such arrangements had been made with independent third parties. 9. During the offering and organizational phase, WNC Capital Corporation, an affiliate of the General Partner, will receive a dealer-manager fee and a nonaccountable underwriting expense allowance in amounts equal to 2% and 1%, respectively, of capital contributions. The General Partner or an affiliate will receive a nonaccountable organizational and offering expense reimbursement in an amount equal to 3% of capital contributions. The General Partner has agreed to pay all organizational and offering expenses (excluding selling commissions, the dealer-manager fee, the nonaccountable underwriting expense allowance and the nonaccountable expense reimbursement). 10. During the acquisition phase, each Series will pay WNC & Associates a fee equal to 7% of capital contributions for analyzing and evaluating potential investments in Local Limited Partnerships and for various other services. WNC & Associates will receive a nonaccountable acquisition expense reimbursement equal to 2% of capital contributions in consideration of which WNC & Associates will pay all acquisition expenses of each Series. Aggregate fees and expenses paid in connection with the organization of each Series, the offering of Units, and the acquisition of Local Limited Partnership interests by each Series will be limited by the Partnership Agreement and will comply with guidelines published by the North American Securities Administrators Association. These guidelines require that a specified percentage (generally 80%, but subject to reduction) of the aggregate Limited Partners' capital contributions to the Fund be committed to Local Limited Partnership interests. 11. During the operating phase, the General Partner will receive 0.1% of any cash available for distribution, and each Series may pay certain fees and reimbursements to the General Partner or its affiliates. An asset management fee will be payable for services related to the administration of the affairs of each Series and ongoing management of each Series. Other fees may be paid in consideration of property management services provided by the General Partner or its affiliates as the management and leasing agents for some of the apartment complexes. In addition, the General Partner and its affiliates generally will be allocated 0.1% of profits and losses of each Series for tax purposes and tax credits. 12. During the liquidation phase, and subject to certain prior payments to the Limited Partners, each Series will pay the General Partner or its affiliates a fee equal to 1% of the sales price of the apartment complexes sold in which the General Partner or its affiliates have provided a substantial amount of services. The General Partner also will receive 10% of any additional sale or refinancing proceeds. 13. All proceeds from a Series' public offering of Units initially will be placed in an escrow account with USbank (“Escrow Agent”). Pending release of offering proceeds to the Series, the Escrow Agent will deposit escrowed funds in short-term United States Government securities, securities issued or guaranteed by the United States Government, and certificates of deposit or time or demand deposits in commercial banks. Upon receipt of a prescribed minimum amount of capital contributions for a Series, funds in escrow will be released to the Series and held by it pending investment in Local Limited Partnerships. 14. If more than one entity that the General Partner or its affiliates advises or manages may invest in a particular investment opportunity, the decision as to the entity that will be allocated the investment will be based upon such factors as the effect of the acquisition on diversification of each entity's portfolio, the estimated income tax effects of the purchase on each entity, the amount of funds of each entity available for investment, and the length of time such funds have been available for investment. Priority generally will be given to the entity having uninvested funds for the longest period of time. However, any entity that was formed to invest primarily in apartment complexes eligible for state low income housing tax credits (“state tax credits”) as well as for Federal low income housing tax credits will be given priority with respect to any investment that is eligible for state tax credits over entities which are not seeking to provide state tax credits. Applicants' Legal Analysis 1. Applicants believe that the Fund and its Series will not be “investment companies” under sections 3(a)(1)(A) or 3(a)(1)(C) of the Act. If the Fund and its Series are deemed to be investment companies, however, applicants request an exemption under sections 6(c) and 6(e) of the Act from all provisions of the Act, except sections 37 through 53 of the Act and the rules and regulations under those sections, other than rule 38a-1. 2. Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the Act provides that an issuer is an “investment company” if it is or holds itself out as being engaged primarily, or proposes to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting, or trading in securities. Applicants believe that the Fund will not be an investment company under section 3(a)(1)(A) because the Fund will be in the business of investing in and being beneficial owner of apartment complexes, not securities. 3. Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Act provides that an issuer is an “investment company” if it is engaged or proposes to engage in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding, or trading in securities, and owns or proposes to acquire “investment securities” having a value exceeding 40% of the value of such issuer's total assets (exclusive of Government securities and cash items). Applicants state that although the Local Limited Partnership interests may be deemed “investment securities,” they are not readily marketable, cannot be sold without severe adverse tax consequences, and have no value apart from the value of the apartment complexes owned by the Local Limited Partnerships. 4. Applicants believe that the two-tier structure is consistent with the purposes and criteria set forth in the Commission's release concerning two-tier real estate partnerships (the “Release”). 1 The Release states that investment companies that are two-tier real estate partnerships that invest in limited partnerships engaged in the development and operation of housing for low and moderate income persons may qualify for an exemption from the Act pursuant to section 6(c). Section 6(c) provides that the Commission may exempt any person from any provision of the Act and any rule thereunder, if, and to the extent that, such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. Section 6(e) permits the Commission to require companies exempted from the registration requirements of the Act to comply with certain specified provisions of the Act as though the company were a registered investment company. 1 Investment Company Act Release No. 8465 (Aug. 9, 1974). 5. The Release lists two conditions, designed for the protection of investors, which must be satisfied by two-tier partnerships to qualify for the exemption under section 6(c). First, interests in the issuer should be sold only to persons for whom investments in limited profit, essentially tax-shelter, investments would not be unsuitable. Second, requirements for fair dealing by the general partner of the issuer with the limited partners of the issuer should be included in the basic organizational documents of the company. 6. Applicants assert, among other things, that the suitability standards set forth in the application, the requirements for fair dealing provided by the Partnership Agreement, and pertinent governmental regulations imposed on each Local Limited Partnership by various Federal, state, and local agencies provide protection to investors in Units. In addition, applicants assert that the requested exemption is both necessary and appropriate in the public interest. For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, pursuant to delegated authority. J. Lynn Taylor, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4353 Filed 8-10-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52216; File No. SR-Amex-2005-024] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto to Establish a Process for the Waiver, Deferral, or Rebate of Listing Fees for Certain Closed-End Funds August 5, 2005. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on February 17, 2005, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared by the Exchange. On July 27, 2005, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange made non-substantive changes to the text of the proposed rule change. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Amex proposes to amend Section 140 of the Amex Company Guide to provide a process for the waiver, deferral, or rebate of listing fees for certain closed-end funds. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Amex's Web site, *http://www.amex.com* , at the Amex's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Amex included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposal. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange is proposing to amend section 140 of the Amex Company Guide to provide that the Amex Board of Governors or its designee may, in its discretion, waive, defer, or rebate all or any part of the initial listing fee applicable to a closed-end fund that transfers to the Amex from another marketplace. The Exchange currently has the authority to waive, defer, or rebate initial listing fees applicable to stocks, bonds, and warrants. 4 To enable the Amex to respond to specific competitive situations, the Exchange believes it is appropriate to provide the authority to waive, defer, or rebate all or any part of the listing fees applicable to closed-end funds that transfer to the Amex from another marketplace. Such authority could be exercised only by the Amex Board of Governors or its designee. At its November 17, 2004, meeting, the Amex Board of Governors delegated authority to a staff committee, as its designee, to determine whether to grant the listing fee waiver, deferral, or rebate. The committee is comprised of management representatives from the Office of the Chairman and the ETF Marketplace, Finance and Listing Qualifications Departments. 5 In addition, an attorney from the Office of the General Counsel would provide legal counsel to the committee. It is contemplated that fee reductions would be granted only infrequently to attract an important listing that is likely to generate significant transaction fee revenue. The committee composition is intended to ensure that fee reduction requests receive an appropriate degree of scrutiny and are granted only under circumstances in which a reduction is warranted for competitive reasons. The waiver, deferral, or rebate of closed-end fund listing fees would not impact the Exchange's resource commitment to regulatory oversight of the listing or other regulatory programs. 6 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50270 (August 26, 2004), 69 FR 53750 (September 2, 2004) (SR-Amex-2004-70). 5 An affirmative vote of a majority of the committee members attending a particular meeting (subject to a three person quorum requirement) would be necessary for waivers, deferrals, or rebates. 6 The Amex believes that if it determines to waive, defer, or rebate listing fees in a comprehensive and/or recurring manner that would constitute a stated policy, practice, or interpretation of an existing rule, the Amex would file an additional rule change pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(1) with respect such policy practice or interpretation. 2. Statutory Basis The Amex believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act 7 in general and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(5) 8 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices and to promote just and equitable principles of trade. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Amex believes that the proposed rule change would impose no burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others The Exchange did not solicit or receive any written comments with respect to the proposal. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period
(i)as the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii)as to which the Exchange consents, the Commission will: A. By order approve such proposed rule change, or B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-Amex-2005-024 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2005-024. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2005-024 and should be submitted on or before September 1, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 9 9 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). J. Lynn Taylor, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4350 Filed 8-10-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52210; File No. SR-NASD-2004-089] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Order Granting Approval To Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Require Limit Order Protection and To Expand the Application of Manning Obligations to Exchange-Listed Securities August 4, 2005. On June 9, 2004, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 a proposed rule change to require members to provide price improvement to customer limit orders under certain circumstances, and to expand the application of NASD IM-2110-2 (“Manning” obligations) to exchange-listed securities. The proposed rule change prohibits a member from trading for its own account in a Nasdaq or exchange-listed security at a price that is better than an unexecuted customer limit order in that security, unless the member immediately thereafter executes the customer limit order at the price at which it traded for its own account or at a better price. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. On November 2, 2004, NASD filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, was published for notice and comment in the **Federal Register** on February 25, 2005. 4 The Commission received no comments on the proposed rule change. This order approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1. 3 Amendment No. 1 replaced NASD's original proposed rule change in its entirety. 4 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51231 (February 18, 2005), 70 FR 9402. The Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities association and, in particular, the requirements of section 15A of the Act 5 and the rules and regulations thereunder. The Commission finds specifically that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 15A(b)(6), 6 which requires, among other things, that NASD's rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The Commission believes that requiring price improvement for customer limit orders as detailed in the proposed rule change, and the expansion of the application of Manning obligations under NASD IM-2110-2 to include exchange-listed securities, will provide the opportunity for investors to receive better limit order executions, and thus enhance the overall integrity of the market. 7 *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act 8 that the proposed rule change (SR-NASD-2004-089) be, and it hereby is, approved, as amended. 5 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3 6 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(6). 7 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* , 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 9 9 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). J. Lynn Taylor, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4349 Filed 8-10-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52206; File No. SR-PCX-2005-59] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment Nos. 1 and 3 Thereto Relating to Amendments to the Exchange's Trade-Through and Locked Markets Rules August 4, 2005. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on April 27, 2005, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (“PCX”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared by the PCX. The PCX filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change on July 8, 2005. 3 The PCX filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change on July 29, 2005 and withdrew Amendment No. 2 on August 1, 2005. The PCX filed Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change on August 1, 2005. 4 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Form 19b-4 dated July 8, 2005 (“Amendment No. 1”). In Amendment No. 1, the PCX revised the rule text to use terms consistent with PCX's current rules and made clarifying changes in the purpose and statutory basis sections. 4 *See* Partial Amendment dated August 1, 2005 (“Amendment No. 3”). In Amendment No. 3, the PCX made clarifying changes to the rule text and the purpose section. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The PCX is proposing to codify the “trade and ship” and “book and ship” concepts pursuant to the Intermarket Option Linkage Plan (“Plan”). The text of the proposed rule change is available on the PCX's Web site ( *http://www.pacificex.com* ), at the PCX's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the PCX included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in item IV below. The PCX has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of the proposed rule change is to provide that:
(i)A Participant Exchange may trade an order at a price that is one minimum quoting increment inferior to the National Best Bid or Offer (“NBBO”) if a Linkage Order 5 is transmitted to the NBBO market(s) to satisfy all interest at the NBBO price (this is the “trade and ship” concept); and
(ii)a Participant Exchange may book an order that would lock another Participant Exchange if a Linkage Order is sent to such other Participant Exchange to satisfy all interest at the lock price (this is the “book and ship” concept). Under the trade and ship proposal, any execution received from the NBBO market must (pursuant to agency obligations) be reassigned to the customer order that is underlying the Linkage Order that was transmitted to “take out” the NBBO market. Below are examples illustrating the applications of these concepts: 5 *See* PCX Rule 6.92(a)(12). Trade and Ship Example. Participant Exchange A is disseminating an offer of $2.00 for 100 contracts. Participant Exchange B is disseminating the national best offer of $1.95 for 10 contracts. No other market is at $1.95. Participant Exchange A receives a 100-contract customer buy order to pay $2.00. Under this proposal, Participant Exchange A could execute 90 contracts (or 100 contracts) of the customer order at $2.00 provided Participant Exchange A simultaneously transmits a 10-contract Principal Acting as Agent (“P/A”) 6 Order to Participant Exchange B to pay $1.95. Assuming an execution is obtained from Participant Exchange B, the customer would receive the 10-contract fill at $1.95 and 90 contracts at $2.00 (if the customer order was originally filled in its entirety at $2.00, an adjustment would be required to provide the customer with the $1.95 price for 10 contracts reflecting the P/A Order execution). As proposed, this would not be deemed a Trade-Through. 6 *See* PCX Rule 6.92(a)(12)(i). Book and Ship Example. Participant Exchange A is disseminating a $1.85-$2.00 market. Participant Exchange B is disseminating a $1.80-$1.95 market. The $1.95 offer is for 10 contracts. No other market is at $1.95. Participant Exchange A receives a customer order to buy 100 contracts at $1.95. Under this proposal, Participant Exchange A could book 90 contracts of the customer buy order at $1.95 provided Participant Exchange A simultaneously transmitted a 10-contract P/A Order to Participant Exchange B to pay $1.95. Assuming an execution is obtained from Participant Exchange B, the customer would receive the 10-contract fill and the rest of the customer's order will be displayed as a $1.95 bid on Participant Exchange A. The national best offer would likely be $2.00. As proposed, this would not be deemed a “locked” market for purposes of the Plan. 2. Statutory Basis The PCX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act 7 in general, and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(5) of the Act 8 in particular, because the proposed rule change is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The PCX does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period
(i)as the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii)as to which the PCX consents, the Commission will:
(A)By order approve such proposed rule change, or
(B)Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-PCX-2005-59 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PCX-2005-59. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the PCX. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PCX-2005-59 and should be submitted on or before September 1, 2005. 9 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 9 J. Lynn Taylor, Assistant Secretary. 6 [FR Doc. E5-4348 Filed 8-10-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52220; File No. SR-Phlx-2005-49] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Impose Licensing Fees in Connection With the Firm-Related Equity Option and Index Option Fee Cap August 5, 2005. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on July 28, 2005, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared by the Exchange. Phlx has designated this proposal as one establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by a self-regulatory organization pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act, 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Phlx proposes to amend its schedule of fees to adopt a license fee of $0.10 for options traded on the following products: 5
(1)Keefe, Bruyette & Woods Regional Banking Index or the KBW Regional Banking Index, traded under the symbol KRX, and
(2)Keefe, Bruyette & Woods Mortgage Finance Index or the KBW Mortgage Finance Index, traded under the symbol MFX (collectively “KBW products”), to be assessed per contract side for index option “firm” transactions (comprised of index option firm/proprietary comparison transactions, index option firm/proprietary transactions and index option firm/proprietary facilitation transactions). This license fee will be imposed only after the Exchange's $60,000 “firm-related” equity option and index option comparison and transaction charge cap, described more fully below, is reached. 5 This fee will be charged to Exchange members. Currently, the Exchange imposes a cap of $60,000 per member organization 6 on all “firm-related” equity option and index option comparison and transaction charges combined. 7 Specifically, “firm-related” charges include equity option firm/proprietary comparison charges, equity option firm/proprietary transaction charges, equity option firm/proprietary facilitation transaction charges, index option firm/proprietary comparison charges, index option firm/proprietary transaction charges, and index option firm/proprietary facilitation transaction charges (collectively “firm-related charges”). Thus, such firm-related charges in the aggregate for one billing month may not exceed $60,000 per month per member organization. 6 The firm/proprietary comparison or transaction charge applies to member organizations for orders for the proprietary account of any member or non-member broker-dealer that derives more than 35% of its annual, gross revenues from commissions and principal transactions with customers. Member organizations are required to verify this amount to the Exchange by certifying that they have reached this threshold by submitting a copy of their annual report, which was prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”). In the event that a member organization has not been in business for one year, the most recent quarterly reports, prepared in accordance with GAAP, are accepted. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43558 (November 14, 2000), 65 FR 69984 (November 21, 2000) (SR-Phlx-2000-85). 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51024 (January 11, 2005), 70 FR 3088 (January 19, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2004-94). The Exchange also imposes a license fee of $0.10 per contract side for equity option and index option “firm” transactions on certain licensed products (collectively “licensed products”) after the $60,000 cap, as described above, is reached. 8 Therefore, when a member organization exceeds the $60,000 cap (comprised of combined firm-related charges), the member organization is charged $60,000, plus license fees of $0.10 per contract side for any contracts in licensed products (if any) over those that were included in reaching the $60,000 cap. In other words, if the cap is reached, the $0.10 license fee is imposed on all subsequent equity option and index option firm transactions; these license fees are charged in addition to the $60,000 cap. 8 For a complete list of licensed products, see $60,000 “Firm Related” Equity Option and Index Option Cap on the Exchange's fee schedule. *See also* , Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52054 (July 18, 2005), 70 FR 42611 (July 25, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-40). The Exchange proposes to adopt a $0.10 license fee per contract side for the KBW products for index option firm transactions, which will be imposed after the $60,000 cap is reached in the same way as the current licensed product fees are assessed. Thus, when a member organization exceeds the $60,000 cap, the member organization will be charged $60,000 plus any applicable license fees for trades of licensed products, including the KBW products, over those trades that were counted in reaching the $60,000 cap. 9 9 Consistent with current practice, when calculating the $60,000 cap, the Exchange first calculates all equity option and index option transaction and comparison charges for products without license fees and then equity option and index option transaction and comparison charges for products with license fees ( *e.g.* , QQQ license fees) that are assessed by the Exchange after the $60,000 cap is reached. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50836 (December 10, 2004), 69 FR 75584 (December 17, 2004) (SR-Phlx-2004-70). The fees set forth in this proposal are scheduled to become effective for transactions settling on or after August 1, 2005. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Phlx's Web site, *http://www.phlx.com* , at the Phlx's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Section. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Phlx included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposal. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of assessing the KBW products license fee of $0.10 per contract side after reaching the $60,000 cap as described in this proposal is to help defray licensing costs associated with the trading of these products, while still capping member organizations' fees enough to attract volume from other exchanges. The cap operates this way in order to offer an incentive for additional volume without leaving the Exchange with significant out-of-pocket costs. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act 10 in general, and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(4) of the Act 11 in particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among Exchange members. 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Phlx believes that the proposed rule change would impose no burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others The Exchange did not solicit or receive any written comments with respect to the proposal. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change has been designated as a fee change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 12 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 13 thereunder. Accordingly, the proposal is effective upon filing with the Commission. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: *Electronic Comments* • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2005-49 on the subject line. *Paper Comments* • Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2005-49. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2005-49 and should be submitted on or before September 1, 2005. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-4352 Filed 8-10-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Request and Comment Request The Social Security Administration
(SSA)publishes a list of information collection packages that will require clearance by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)in compliance with Public Law 104-13, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, effective October 1, 1995. The information collection packages that may be included in this notice are for revisions to OMB-approved information collections, extensions (no change) of OMB-approved information collections and new information collection requests. SSA is soliciting comments on the accuracy of the agency's burden estimate; the need for the information; its practical utility; ways to enhance its quality, utility, and clarity; and on ways to minimize burden on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Written comments and recommendations regarding the information collection(s) should be submitted to the OMB Desk Officer and the SSA Reports Clearance Officer. The information can be mailed and/or faxed to the individuals at the addresses and fax numbers listed below:
(OMB)Office of Management and Budget, Fax: 202-395-6974.
(SSA)Social Security Administration, DCFAM, Attn: Reports Clearance Officer, 1333 Annex Building, 6401 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21235. Fax: 410-965-6400. I. The information collections listed below are pending at SSA and will be submitted to OMB within 60 days from the date of this notice. Therefore, your comments should be submitted to SSA within 60 days from the date of this publication. You can obtain copies of the collection instruments by calling the SSA Reports Clearance Officer at 410-965-0454 or by writing to the address listed above. 1. Annual Registration Statement Identifying Separated Participants With Deferred Benefits, Schedule SSA—0960-0606 Schedule SSA is a form filed annually as part of a series of pension plan documents required by section 6057 of the IRS Code. Administrators of pension benefit plans are required to report specific information on future plan benefits for those participants who left plan coverage during the year. SSA maintains the information until a claim for Social Security benefits has been approved. At that time, SSA notifies the beneficiary of his/her potential eligibility for payments from the private pension plan. The respondents are administrators of pension benefit plans or their service providers employed to prepare the schedule SSA on behalf of the pension benefit plan. Below are the estimates of the cost and hour burdens for completing and filing schedule SSA(s). We have used an average to estimate the hour burden. However, the burden may be greater or smaller depending on whether the respondent is a large or small pension benefit plan and how many schedule SSA's are filed in a given year. *Type of Request:* Extension of an OMB-approved information collection. *Number of Respondents:* 88,000. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden Per Response:* 2.5 hours. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 220,000 hours. *Estimated Annual Cost Burden for all Respondents:* $12,194,400. 2. Protection and Advocacy for Beneficiaries of Social Security (PABSS)—0960-NEW Background In August of 2004, SSA announced its intention to award grants to establish community-based protection and advocacy projects in every State and U.S. Territory, as authorized under section 1150 of the Social Security Act. Potential awardees were protection and advocacy organizations established under Title I of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act which submitted a timely application conforming to the requirements in the notice. The projects funded under this grant are part of SSA's strategy to increase the number of beneficiaries who return to work and achieve self-sufficiency as the result of receiving advocacy or other services. The overall goal of the program is to provide information and advice about obtaining vocational rehabilitation and employment services and to provide advocacy or other services that a beneficiary with a disability may need to secure, maintain, or regain gainful employment. Collection Activities The PABSS project collects identifying information from the project sites and benefits specialists. In addition, data are collected from the beneficiaries on background, employment, training, benefits, and work incentives. SSA uses the information to manage the program, with particular emphasis on contract administration, budgeting, and training. SSA also uses the information to evaluate the efficacy of the program and to ensure that those dollars appropriated for PABSS services are being spent on SSA beneficiaries. The project data will be valuable to SSA in its analysis of and future planning for the Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income programs. *Type of Request:* New information collection. Title of collection Number of annual responses Frequency of response Average burden per response (minutes) Estimated annual burden hours Site 57 5 1.8 8.6 Specialist 225 5 1.8 33.8 Beneficiary 60,000 1 5.3 5,300 Total Estimated Annual Burden 5,342 II. The information collections listed below have been submitted to OMB for clearance. Your comments on the information collections would be most useful if received by OMB and SSA within 30 days from the date of this publication. You can obtain a copy of the OMB clearance package by calling the SSA Reports Clearance Officer at 410-965-0454, or by writing to the address listed above. Statement Regarding Date of Birth and Citizenship—20 CFR 404.716—0960-0016 Form SSA-702 collects information needed when preferred or other evidence is not available to prove age or citizenship for an individual applying for Social Security benefits. SSA uses this form for individuals who must establish age as a factor of entitlement or U.S. citizenship as a payment factor. Respondents are applicants for one or more Social Security benefits who need to establish their dates of birth as a factor of entitlement or U.S. citizenship as a factor of payment. *Type of Request:* Extension of an OMB-approved information collection. *Number of Respondents:* 1,200. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden Per Response:* 10 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 200 hours. National Direct Deposit Initiative—31 CFR 210—0960-NEW Many recipients of social security benefits choose to receive their payments via the Direct Deposit Program, in which funds are transferred directly into recipients' accounts at a financial institution (FI). However, 8 million Title II payment recipients still receive their payments through traditional paper checks. In an effort to encourage these beneficiaries to change from paper checks to the Direct Deposit Program, SSA is collaborating with the Department of the Treasury and several FIs to implement the National Direct Deposit Initiative. In this program, SSA will work with FIs to determine which of the target 8 million Title II beneficiaries have accounts at the participating banks. The banks will then send forms to these beneficiaries encouraging them to enroll in the Direct Deposit Program. The respondents are the participating FIs and Title II beneficiaries currently receiving their payments via check. *Type of Request:* New information collection. Note: Please note that in the 60-day **Federal Register** Notice (published on May 13, 2005 at 70 FR 25643) we reported different data for the number of respondents, total burden, and cost burden. Since that time, SSA has received updated information on these categories. The new numbers in the chart below reflect the updated data. Respondents Information collection requirement Number of respondents Frequency of response Average burden per response (minutes) Estimated annual burden (hours) Cost requirement Estimated cost burden per respondent Total annual cost burden Title II Payment Recipients Direct Deposit Enrollment Form 100,000 1 2 3,333 N/A N/A N/A Financial Institutions (banks) Data screening/matching activities; SSA's data management requirements 10 1 240 40 Printing and mailing of 100,000 Enrollment Forms $1,039 $10,390 Totals 110,000 3,373 10,390 Dated: August 8, 2005. Elizabeth A. Davidson, Reports Clearance Officer, Social Security Administration. [FR Doc. 05-15963 Filed 8-10-05; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 7
5 references not yet in our index
  • 10 CFR 50
  • 17 CFR 240.19
  • 15 USC 78
  • Pub. L. 104-13
  • 31 CFR 210
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of an application for an order under sections 6(c) and 6(e) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) granting relief from all provisions of the Act, except sections 37 through 53 of the Act and the rules and regulations under those sections, other than rule 38a-1
C.F.R.§ 51.21
U.S.C.§ 78s
U.S.C.§ 78f
U.S.C.§ 552
C.F.R.§ 200.30-3
U.S.C.§ 78c
C.F.R.§ 404.716
Cite10 CFR 50
Cite17 CFR 240.19
Cite15 USC 78
Pub. L.Pub. L. 104-13
Cite31 CFR 210
Cites 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.