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 · 2005-12-22 · NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION · Notices

Notices. Notice of opportunity for public comment

33,867 words·~154 min read·/register/2005/12/22/05-24430·

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

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-334, 50-412, 50-346 and 50-440; License Nos. DPR-66 and NPF-73, NPF-3 and NPF-58] Pennsylvania Power Company, Ohio Edison Company, OES Nuclear, Inc., The Cleveland Electric, Illuminating Company, The Toledo Edison Company, Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, (Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2), (Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1), (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1); Order Superceding Order of November 15, 2005 Approving Transfer of Licenses and Conforming Amendments FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) and Pennsylvania Power Company (Penn Power), Ohio Edison Company (Ohio Edison), OES Nuclear, Inc.
(OES Nuclear), the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (Cleveland Electric), and the Toledo Edison Company (Toledo Edison), are holders of Facility Operating Licenses Nos. DPR-66, NPF-73, NPF-3 and NPF-58, which authorize the possession, use, and operation of Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 (BVPS 1) and 2 (BVPS 2; together with BVPS 1, BVPS), Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (Davis-Besse), and Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 (Perry), respectively. FENOC is licensed by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, the Commission) to operate BVPS, Davis-Besse, and Perry (the facilities). The facilities are located at the licensees' sites in Beaver County, Pennsylvania, Ottawa County, Ohio, and Lake County, Ohio, respectively. By letter dated May 18, 2005, FENOC submitted an application requesting approval of direct license transfers that would be necessary in connection with the following proposed transfers to FirstEnergy Nuclear Generation Corporation (FENGenCo), a new nuclear generation subsidiary of FirstEnergy:
Penn Power's 65-percent undivided ownership interest in BVPS 1, 13.74-percent undivided ownership interest in BVPS 2, and 5.24-percent undivided ownership interest in Perry. By letter dated June 1, 2005, FENOC submitted a second application requesting approval of direct license transfers that would be necessary in connection with the following proposed transfers to FENGenCo: Ohio Edison's 35-percent undivided ownership interest in BVPS 1 and 20.22-percent undivided ownership interest in BVPS 2;
OES Nuclear's 17.42-percent undivided ownership interest in Perry; Cleveland Electric's 24.47-percent undivided ownership interest in BVPS 2, 44.85-percent undivided ownership interest in Perry, and 51.38-percent undivided ownership interest in Davis-Besse; and, Toledo Edison's 1.65-percent undivided ownership interest in BVPS 2, 19.91-percent undivided ownership interest in Perry, and 48.62-percent undivided ownership interest in Davis-Besse. Supplemental information was provided by letters dated July 15 and October 31, 2005, (hereinafter, the May 18 and June 1, 2005, applications and supplemental information will be referred to collectively as the “applications”).
FENOC also requested approval of conforming license amendments that would reflect the proposed transfer of ownership of Penn Power's interests in BVPS and Perry to FENGenCo; delete the references to Penn Power in the licenses; authorize FENGenCo to possess the respective ownership interests in BVPS and Perry; reflect the proposed transfer of ownership interests in BVPS, Davis-Besse, and Perry from Ohio Edison, OES Nuclear, Cleveland Electric, and Toledo Edison (Ohio Companies) to FENGenCo; delete the Ohio Companies from the licenses except those continuing to hold leased interests; and, authorize FENGenCo to possess the respective ownership interests in BVPS, Davis-Besse, and Perry being transferred by the Ohio Companies.
Ohio Edison's 21.66-percent leased interest in BVPS 2, Toledo Edison's 18.26-percent leased interest in BVPS 2, and Ohio Edison's 12.58-percent leased interest in Perry would not be changed. No physical changes to the facilities or operational changes were proposed in the applications. After completion of the proposed transfers, the role of FENOC would be unchanged. Approval of the transfer of the facility operating licenses and conforming license amendments is requested by FENOC pursuant to §§ 50.80 and 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR).
Notices of the requests for approval and opportunity for a hearing were published in the **Federal Register** on August 2, 2005 (70 FR 44390-44395). No comments were received. Two petitions for leave to intervene pursuant to 10 CFR 2.309 were received on August 22, 2005, from the City of Cleveland, Ohio, and American Municipal Power-Ohio, Inc. A joint motion to lodge by the City of Cleveland, Ohio and Municipal Power Ohio, Inc., was received on September 12, 2005. The petitions and motion are under consideration by the Commission.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80, no license, or any right thereunder, shall be transferred, directly or indirectly, through transfer of control of the license, unless the Commission shall give its consent in writing. Upon review of the information in the application and other information before the Commission, and relying upon the representations and agreements contained in the application, the NRC staff has determined that FENGenCo is qualified to hold the ownership interests in the facilities previously held by Penn Power and the Ohio Companies, and that the transfers of undivided ownership interests in the facilities to FENGenCo described in the applications are otherwise consistent with applicable provisions of law, regulations, and orders issued by the Commission, subject to the conditions set forth below.
The NRC staff has further found that the applications for the proposed license amendments comply with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; the facilities will operate in conformity with the applications, the provisions of the Act and the rules and regulations of the Commission; there is reasonable assurance that the activities authorized by the proposed license amendments can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public and that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations; the issuance of the proposed license amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and the issuance of the proposed amendments will be in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.
On November 15, 2005, the Commission issued, “Order Approving Transfer of Licenses and Conforming Amendments Relating to Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, and Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1.” Subsequently, the NRC staff determined that corrections were needed to the cover letter, Order, conforming amendments and safety evaluations. This Order contains the correction and supercedes the Order issued on November 15, 2005. The findings set forth above are supported by a corrected NRC safety evaluation dated December 16, 2005.
Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 161b, 161i, 161o, and 184 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 2201(b), 2201(i), 2201(o), and 2234; and 10 CFR 50.80, *it is hereby ordered* that the direct transfers of the licenses, as described herein, to FENGenCo are approved, subject to the following conditions:
(1)On the closing date(s) of the transfers to FENGenCo of their interests in BVPS 1, BVPS 2, Davis-Besse, and Perry, Penn Power, Cleveland Electric, Ohio Edison, OES Nuclear, and Toledo Edison shall transfer to FENGenCo all of each transferor's respective accumulated decommissioning funds for BVPS 1, BVPS 2, Davis-Besse, and Perry, except for funds associated with the leased portions of Perry and BVPS 2, and tender to FENGenCo additional amounts equal to remaining funds expected to be collected in 2005, as represented in the application dated June 1, 2005, but not yet collected by the time of closing. All of the funds shall be deposited in separate external trust funds for each of these four reactors in the same amounts as received with respect to each unit; to be segregated from other assets of FENGenCo and outside its administrative control, as required by NRC regulations, and FENGenCo shall take all necessary steps to ensure that these external trust funds are maintained in accordance with the requirements of this Order approving the transfer of the licenses and consistent with the safety evaluation supporting the order and in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.75, “Reporting and recordkeeping for decommissioning planning.”
(2)By the date of closing of the transfer of the ownership interests in BVPS 1, BVPS 2, and Perry, from Penn Power to FENGenCo, FENGenCo shall obtain a parent company guarantee from FirstEnergy in an initial amount of at least $80 million (in 2005 dollars) to provide additional decommissioning funding assurance regarding such ownership interests. Required funding levels shall be recalculated annually and, as necessary, FENGenCo shall either obtain appropriate adjustments to the parent company guarantee or otherwise provide any additional decommissioning funding assurance necessary for FENGenCo to meet NRC requirements under 10 CFR 50.75.
(3)The Support Agreements described in the applications dated May 18, 2005 (up to $80 million), and June 1, 2005 (up to $400 million), shall be effective consistent with the representations contained in the applications. FENGenCo shall take no action to cause FirstEnergy, or its successors and assigns, to void, cancel, or modify the Support Agreements without the prior written consent of the NRC staff, except, however, the $80 million Support Agreement in connection with the transfer of the Penn Power interests may be revoked or rescinded if and when the $400 million support agreement described in the June 1, 2005 application becomes effective. FENGenCo shall inform the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, in writing, no later than 10 days after any funds are provided to FENGenCo by FirstEnergy under either Support Agreement.
(4)Prior to completion of the transfers of the licenses, FENGenCo shall provide the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation satisfactory documentary evidence that it has obtained the appropriate amount of insurance required of licensees under 10 CFR part 140 of the Commission's regulations. *It is further ordered* that, consistent with 10 CFR 2.1315(b), license amendments that make changes, as indicated in Enclosures 2 through 5 to the cover letter forwarding this Order, to conform the licenses to reflect the subject direct license transfers are approved. FirstEnergy has indicated that the Pennsylvania transfers described in the May 18, 2005, application and the Ohio transfers described in the June 1, 2005, application, will take place at the same time. The amendments shall be issued and made effective at the time the proposed direct license transfers are completed. *It is further ordered* that FENOC shall inform the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation in writing of the date of closing of the transfer of the Penn Power, Cleveland Electric, Ohio Edison, OES Nuclear, and Toledo Edison interests in BVPS 1, BVPS 2, Davis-Besse, and Perry no later than 5 business days prior to closing. Should the transfer of the licenses not be completed by December 31, 2006, this Order shall become null and void, provided; however, that upon written application and for good cause shown, such date may be extended by order. This Order supercedes the Order issued on November 15, 2005, and is effective as of December 16, 2005. For further details with respect to this Order, see the initial applications dated May 18 and June 1, 2005, as supplemented by letters dated July 15 and October 31, 2005, and the revised non-proprietary safety evaluation dated December 16, 2005, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland and 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, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 16th day of December 2005. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. J.E. Dyer, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-7723 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366] Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 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, section 50.55a(b)(2)(ix)(G), for Facility Operating License Nos. DRP-57 and NPF-5, issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (the licensee), for operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (Hatch), located in Appling County, Georgia. 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 The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55a(b)(2)(ix)(G) and allow the licensee to perform a general visual examination of the accessible surface areas of the containment vessel pressure retaining vent system, in lieu of the VT-3 examination required by 10 CFR. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated March 30, 2005, as supplemented by letters dated August 2 and 24, 2005. The Need for the Proposed Action During the 3rd 10-year inservice inspection
(ISI)interval, which ends December 31, 2005, the licensee's code of record, the 1992 American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code), including the 1992 addenda, required a VT-3 examination of the accessible surface areas of the boiling water reactor
(BWR)vent system. For the 3rd 10-year ISI interval, by letter dated July 19, 2000, the licensee requested in Relief Request RR-MC-9 to perform a general visual examination in lieu of the VT-3 examination. The licensee explained that the proposed alternative was sufficient to detect the types of corrosion expected in the BWR vent system. This request was approved by the NRC by letter dated October 4, 2000. For the 4th 10-year ISI interval, the licensee's code of record will be the 2001 edition through the 2003 addenda of the ASME Code. Modifications to the ASME Code and 10 CFR 50.55a have relocated the requirement to perform the VT-3 examination from the ASME Code to 10 CFR 50.55a(b)(2)(ix)(G). The licensee believes that the examination provisions previously authorized through Relief Request RR-MC-9 have proven to be sufficient to maintain the structural integrity and leak-tightness of the containment surfaces, and, therefore, serve the underlying purpose of the rule. The licensee is requesting to continue the use of similar provisions during the 4th ISI interval through an exemption. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that performing a general visual examination as part of maintaining the integrity of the coating system will ensure the integrity of the coated vent system components, providing an acceptable level of quality and safety. The details of the NRC staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the exemption from the regulation. 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 off site. There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent released off site. 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 nonradiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant nonradiological 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 Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 and Unit 2,” dated October 1972, and NUREG-0417, “Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 2,” dated March 1978. Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its stated policy, on November 30, 2005, the staff consulted with the Georgia State official, James Hardeman, of the Department of Natural Resources, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action for Hatch. 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 letter dated March 30, 2005, as supplemented by letters dated August 2 and 24, 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, 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 send an e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of December 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Christopher Gratton, Sr. Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-7704 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Proposed Generic Communication Post-Fire Safe-Shutdown Circuit Analysis Spurious Actuations AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public comment. Reopening of comment period. SUMMARY: On October 19, 2005 (70 FR 60859), the NRC published for public comment a generic letter
(GL)to:
(1)Request addressees to review their fire protection program to confirm compliance with existing applicable regulatory requirements regarding their assumptions of the phrase “one-at-a-time” in light of the information provided in this GL and, if appropriate, take additional actions to return to compliance. Specifically, although some licensees have performed their post-fire, safe-shutdown circuit analyses based on an assumption of only a single spurious actuation per fire event or that spurious actuations will occur “one-at-a-time,” recent industry cable fire test results demonstrated that these assumptions are not valid.
(2)Require addressees to submit a written response to the NRC in accordance with NRC regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.54(f). The Nuclear Energy Institute
(NEI)has requested a 45-day extension of the comment period. NEI believes that additional time will be needed to provide appropriate comments on the draft GL. NEI based its request on the time needed to perform an assessment of the safety significance of multiple sequential and cumulative failures; an evaluation of the industry test results and interviews with the industry project team; an evaluation of the NUREG/CR-6776, and an assessment of the NRC/licensee documentation associated with the prior NRC staff positions and practices related to safe-shutdown circuit analysis. The NRC has decided to reopen the comment period for an additional 45 days. This **Federal Register** notice is available through the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under accession number ML051650017. DATES: The comment period has been extended and now expires February 6, 2006. Comments submitted after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given except for comments received on or before this date. ADDRESSEES: Submit written comments to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T6-D59, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and cite the publication date and page number of this **Federal Register** notice. Written comments may also be delivered to NRC Headquarters, 11545 Rockville Pike (Room T-6D59), Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm on Federal workdays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Wolfgang at 301-415-1624 or by e-mail: *rjw1@nrc.gov.* Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room at One White Flint North, 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/NRC/ADAMS/index.html.* If you do not have access to ADAMS or if you have problems in accessing the documents in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room
(PDR)reference staff at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this Friday the 16th day of December 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Christopher I. Grimes, Division of Policy and Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-7702 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Proposed Collection; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available from: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. Extension: Rule 12f-1; SEC File No. 270-139; OMB Control No. 3235-0128. 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”) is soliciting comments on the collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit the existing collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget for extension and approval. • Applications for Permission To Reinstate Unlisted Trading Privileges Rule 12f-1 (the “Rule”), originally adopted in 1934 pursuant to sections 12(f) and 23(a) of the Act and as modified in 1995, sets forth the information which an exchange must include in an application to reinstate its ability to extend unlisted trading privileges to any security for which such unlisted trading privileges have been suspended by the Commission, pursuant to section 12(f)(2)(A) of the Act. An application must provide the name of the issuer, the title of the security, the name of each national securities exchange, if any, on which the security is listed or admitted to unlisted trading privileges, whether transaction information concerning such security is reported pursuant to an effective transaction reporting plan contemplated by Rule 601 under the Act, the date of the Commission's suspension of unlisted trading privileges in the security on the exchange, and any other pertinent information. Rule 12f-1 further requires a national securities exchange seeking to reinstate its ability to extend unlisted trading privileges to a security to indicate that it has provided a copy of such application to the issuer of the security, as well as to any other national securities exchange on which the security is listed or admitted to unlisted trading privileges. The information required by Rule 12f-1 enables the Commission to make the necessary findings under the Act prior to granting applications to reinstate unlisted trading privileges. This information is also made available to members of the public who may wish to comment upon the applications. Without the Rule, the Commission would be unable to fulfill these statutory responsibilities. There are currently eight national securities exchanges subject to Rule 12f-1. The burden of complying with Rule 12f-1 arises when a potential respondent seeks to reinstate its ability to extend unlisted trading privileges to any security for which unlisted trading privileges have been suspended by the Commission, pursuant to section 12(f)(2)(A) of the Act. The staff estimates that each application would require approximately one hour to complete. Thus each potential respondent would incur on average one burden hour in complying with the Rule. The Commission staff estimates that there could be as many as eight responses annually and that each respondent's related cost of compliance with Rule 12f-1 would be $53.55, or, the cost of one hour of professional work needed to complete the application. The total annual related reporting cost for all potential respondents, therefore, is $428.40 (8 responses × $53.55/response). Written comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this publication. Direct your written comments to R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Office of Information Technology, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Dated: December 12, 2005. Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-7671 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Proposed Collection; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available from: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. Extension: Rule 12f-3; SEC File No. 270-141; OMB Control No. 3235-0249. 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”) is soliciting comments on the collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit the existing collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget for extension and approval. • Termination or Suspension of Unlisted Trading Privileges Rule 12f-3 (the “Rule”), which was originally adopted in 1934 pursuant to sections 12(f) and 23(a) of the Act, as modified in 1995, prescribes the information which must be included in applications for and notices of termination or suspension of unlisted trading privileges for a security as contemplated in section 12(f)(4) of the Act. An application must provide, among other things, the name of the applicant; a brief statement of the applicant's interest in the question of termination or suspension of such unlisted trading privileges; the title of the security; the name of the issuer; certain information regarding the size of the class of security and its recent trading history; and a statement indicating that the applicant has provided a copy of such application to the exchange from which the suspension or termination of unlisted trading privileges are sought, and to any other exchange on which the security is listed or admitted to unlisted trading privileges. The information required to be included in applications submitted pursuant to Rule 12f-3, is intended to provide the Commission with sufficient information to make the necessary findings under the Act to terminate or suspend by order the unlisted trading privileges granted a security on a national securities exchange. Without the Rule, the Commission would be unable to fulfill these statutory responsibilities. The burden of complying with Rule 12f-3 arises when a potential respondent, having a demonstrable bona fide interest in the question of termination or suspension of the unlisted trading privileges of a security, determines to seek such termination or suspension. The staff estimates that each such application to terminate or suspend unlisted trading privileges requires approximately one hour to complete. Thus each potential respondent would incur on average one burden hour in complying with the Rule. The Commission staff estimates that there could be as many as ten responses annually and that each respondent's related cost of compliance with Rule 12f-3 would be $53.55, or, the cost of one hour of professional work needed to complete the application. The total annual related reporting cost for all potential respondents, therefore, is $535.50 (10 responses × $53.55/response). Written comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this publication. Direct your written comments to R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Office of Information Technology, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Dated: December 12, 2005. Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-7672 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52957; File No. SR-CBOE-2005-102] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Duration of CBOE Rule 6.45A(b) Pertaining to Orders Represented in Open Outcry December 15, 2005. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on December 13, 2005, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the CBOE. The Exchange filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. 5 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)(iii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 5 The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay required by Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). *See* discussion *infra* Section III. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The CBOE proposes to extend the duration of CBOE Rule 6.45A(b) (the “Rule”), which relates to the allocation of orders represented in open outcry in equity option classes designated by the Exchange to be traded on the CBOE Hybrid Trading System (“Hybrid”), through March 14, 2006. No other substantive changes are being made to the Rule. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the CBOE's Internet Web site ( *http://www.cboe.com* ), at the CBOE'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 CBOE 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 those 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 parts of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose In March 2005, the Commission approved revisions to CBOE Rule 6.45A related to the introduction of Remote Market-Makers. 6 Among other things, the Rule, pertaining to the allocation of orders represented in open outcry in equity options classes traded on Hybrid, was amended to clarify that only in-crowd market participants would be eligible to participate in open outcry trade allocations. In addition, the Rule was amended to limit its duration until September 14, 2005, unless otherwise extended. The duration of the Rule was thereafter extended until December 14, 2005. 7 As the duration period expires on December 14, 2005, the Exchange proposes to extend the effectiveness of the Rule through March 14, 2006. 8 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51366 (March 14, 2005), 70 FR 13217 (March 18, 2005) (SR-CBOE-2004-75). 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52423 (September 14, 2005), 70 FR 55194 (September 20, 2005) (SR-CBOE-2005-76). 8 In order to effect proprietary transactions on the floor of the Exchange, in addition to complying with the requirements of the Rule, members are also required to comply with the requirements of Section 11(a)(1) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1), or qualify for an exemption. Section 11(a)(1) restricts securities transactions of a member of any national securities exchange effected on that exchange for
(i)the member's own account,
(ii)the account of a person associated with the member, or
(iii)an account over which the member or a person associated with the member exercises discretion, unless a specific exemption is available. The Exchange issued a regulatory circular to members informing them of the applicability of these Section 11(a)(1) requirements when the duration of the Rule was extended until December 14, 2005. *See* CBOE Regulatory Circular RG05-103 (November 2, 2005). The Exchange has represented that it expects to issue a similar regulatory circular to members reminding them of the applicability of the Section 11(a)(1) requirements with respect to the proposed rule change. Telephone conversation between Jennifer Lamie, Managing Senior Attorney, CBOE, and Edward Cho, Attorney, Division of Market Regulation, Commission (December 15, 2005). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations under the Act applicable to a national securities exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. 9 Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) 10 requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The CBOE 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 The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposal. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change:
(1)Does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)does not impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)does not become operative for thirty days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 11 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 12 thereunder. 13 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 13 Pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange has given the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date on which the Exchange filed the proposed rule change. *See* 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). A proposed rule change filed under Commission Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 14 normally does not become operative prior to thirty days after the date of filing. The CBOE requests that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay, as specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), and designate the proposed rule change to become operative immediately to allow the Exchange to continue to operate under the existing allocation parameters for orders represented in open outcry in Hybrid on an uninterrupted basis. The Commission hereby grants the request. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because such waiver will allow the CBOE to continue to operate under the Rule without interruption. For these reasons, the Commission designates the proposed rule change as effective and operative immediately. 15 14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 15 For the purposes only of waiving the operative date of this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such proposed 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. 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-CBOE-2005-102 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-CBOE-2005-102. 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, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the CBOE. 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-CBOE-2005-102 and should be submitted on or before January 12, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 16 16 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-7665 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52913A; File No. SR-CBOE-2005-97] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating To Revisions to the Series 4 Examination Program December 15, 2005. Correction FR Doc. E5-7338, issued on December 14, 2005, 1 incorrectly identified the exchange in the first sentence of the first paragraph of Release No. 34-52913. The corrected sentence reads as follows: 1 * See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52913 (December 7, 2005), 70 FR 74068. “Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 3 notice is hereby given that on November 15, 2005, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by CBOE.” 2 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 3 17 CFR 240.19b-4. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 4 4 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-7666 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52914A; File No. SR-CBOE-2005-98] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating To Revisions to the Series 9/10 Examination Program December 15, 2005. Correction FR Doc. E5-7337, issued on December 14, 2005, 1 incorrectly identified the exchange in the first sentence of the first paragraph of Release No. 34-52914. The corrected sentence reads as follows: 1 * See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52914 (December 7, 2005), 70 FR 74067. “Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 3 notice is hereby given that on November 16, 2005, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the CBOE.” 2 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 3 17 CFR 240.19b-4. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 4 4 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-7667 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52952; File No. SR-CBOE-2005-101] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Membership Rules December 14, 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 November 29, 2005, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” 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 CBOE. 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 I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to revise a CBOE membership rule that relates to CBOE's investigation of membership applicants. The text of the proposed rule change is available on CBOE's Web site ( *http://www.cboe.com* ), at CBOE'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, CBOE included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposal 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. CBOE 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 Exchange is proposing to revise CBOE Rule 3.9(f), which currently provides that the Membership Department shall investigate each applicant applying to be a member organization, each associated person required to be approved by the Membership Committee pursuant to CBOE Rule 3.6(b), 3 and each applicant applying to be an individual member (collectively, “Membership Applicants”). As part of the current application process, Membership Applicants are required to submit fingerprints to the Exchange, which then forwards the fingerprints to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. 3 Pursuant to CBOE Rule 3.6(b), the Membership Committee generally investigates all persons who are listed on Form BD as a direct owner or executive officer of a CBOE member organization. To conduct its investigation, CBOE's Membership Department currently accepts fingerprints from Membership Applicants in two forms: Electronic fingerprints that are taken at the Exchange and fingerprints that are taken manually on Exchange hardcopy fingerprints cards at a location other than the Exchange. The Exchange currently requires Membership Applicants to submit new fingerprints to the Exchange for processing pursuant to the investigation process under Rule 3.9(f) even if the Membership Applicant was recently fingerprinted at another self-regulatory organization (“SRO”). The proposed rule change would permit the Exchange to accept the results of a fingerprint-based criminal records check of the Membership Applicant conducted by another SRO within the prior year pursuant to that investigation process. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will lessen the administrative burden imposed on Membership Applicants having to obtain fingerprints on multiple occasions within a relatively short time period, while still preserving the Exchange's ability to conduct a thorough investigation of the Membership Applicant. The Exchange notes that, in addition to a fingerprint-based criminal records check, a Form U-4 (Uniform Application for Securities Industry Registration or Transfer) is required to be submitted to the Exchange by Membership Applicants as part of the application process solely for informational purposes. Form U-4 contains disclosure questions that ask whether the Membership Applicant is subject to events that would constitute a statutory disqualification. Since the Exchange obtains this information as part of the application process, and since CBOE Rule 3.9(d) 4 requires Membership Applicants to promptly update membership application materials if the information provided in the materials becomes inaccurate or incomplete after the date of submission, the Exchange believes that the Membership Department would still receive notice if a Membership Applicant became subject to a statutory disqualification subsequent to the date of the results of the fingerprint-based criminal records check conducted by another SRO. 4 CBOE Rule 3.9(d) states as follows: “Each applicant shall promptly update the application materials submitted to the Membership Department if any of the information provided in these materials becomes inaccurate or incomplete after the date of submission of the application to the Membership Department and prior to any approval of the application.” 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change improves the Exchange's investigation process by streamlining the fingerprinting portion of the process, and therefore reducing the administrative burdens on Membership Applicants, while still allowing for the Exchange to obtain the information it needs to determine whether the Exchange's qualification criteria under its membership rules are satisfied. Therefore, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. 5 Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) 6 requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would not 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 No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. 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 self-regulatory organization 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-CBOE-2005-101 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-CBOE-2005-101. 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 CBOE. 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-CBOE-2005-101 and should be submitted on or before January 12, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 7 7 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-7669 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52953; File No. SR-CHX-2005-36] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change by the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Regarding Trading in Sub-Penny Increments December 14, 2005. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on November 1, 2005, the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (the “CHX” or the “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 CHX. On December 7, 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 *See* Form 19b-4 dated December 7, 2005. (“Amendment No. 1”). In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange:
(1)Deleted any references to customer orders to make clear that a specialist must not “step ahead” of any order in the book (not just customer orders) by less than $0.01;
(2)deleted a proposed sentence relating to a specialist's trading in other markets;
(3)revised the rule text to confirm the smallest increment ($0.0001) in which an order may be executed on the Exchange; and
(4)made clear that this proposal relates only to the Exchange's current trading model. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Through this filing, the Exchange proposes to amend its rules to permit Exchange participants to execute orders in sub-penny increments. The text of this proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at *http://www.chx.com/rules/proposed_rules.htm* , at the Exchange's principal office, and in 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 CHX included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received regarding the proposal. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The CHX 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 Under the Exchange's existing trading rules, the Exchange's participants may not bid or offer in increments below $0.01. 4 Through this filing, the Exchange seeks to permit its participants to execute trades in sub-penny increments and to establish rules that regulate the instances when a specialist may trade in sub-penny increments against incoming orders when there are orders in the specialist's book. 5 4 The Exchange does not currently have a rule that sets a minimum increment at which trades can occur. Its rule relating to minimum variations specifically refers to variations at which bids or offers may be made on the Exchange. *See* Article XX, Rule 22. 5 The Exchange intends to file a separate proposal to permit its participants and customers, beginning with the compliance date of Rule 612, to bid or offer in sub-penny increments in Nasdaq/NM securities, when those bids or offers are priced less than $1.00 per share. As an initial matter, the proposed rule change would provide that Exchange participants may execute transactions in sub-penny increments. 6 As noted above, there is not currently an Exchange rule that prohibits this practice, but the Exchange believes it is appropriate to establish that trading in sub-penny increments is specifically permitted. The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to allow its participants to execute transactions in sub-penny increments because other markets permit trading in these increments and the Exchange and its participants would be at a competitive disadvantage if this trading were not permitted. 7 6 *See* proposed Article XX, Rule 22(b). 7 In addition, although Rule 612 of Regulation NMS specifically prohibits the display, ranking, or acceptance of a bid, offer, or order in sub-penny increments where the bid, offer, or order is priced at or above $1.00, it does not prohibit trading in sub-penny increments. *See* 17 CFR 242.612(a). Indeed, the Commission, in the release of the final rules associated with Regulation NMS, noted that “Rule 612 will not prohibit a sub-penny execution resulting from * * * price improvement * * * so long as the execution did not result from an impermissible sub-penny order or quotation.” Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496, 37556 (June 29, 2005). Additionally, the proposed rule change would provide that an Exchange specialist (or a market maker holding a customer order) may not execute an incoming order in a sub-penny increment that is less than $0.01 better than a limit order in the specialist's (or market maker's) book. This prohibition on “stepping ahead” of a resting limit order for less than a penny would be expanded from its current scope, which applies only to the trading of Nasdaq/NM securities, to apply to the trading of all securities on the Exchange. 8 The Exchange believes that this rule, which provides protection to orders in a specialist's book, should be extended to orders in listed securities before an Exchange specialist is permitted to. 8 The Exchange's rule relating to sub-penny trading in Nasdaq/NM securities was first approved in 2001 and has been extended many times. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 44164 (April 6, 2001), 66 FR 19263 (April 13, 2001); 44535 (July 10, 2001), 66 FR 37251 (July 17, 2001) (extending pilot through November 5, 2001); 45062 (November 15, 2001), 66 FR 58768 (November 23, 2001) (extending pilot through January 14, 2002); 45386 (February 1, 2002), 67 FR 6062 (February 8, 2002) (extending the pilot through April 15, 2002); 45755 (April 15, 2002), 67 FR 19607 (April 22, 2002) (extending the pilot through September 30, 2002); 46587 (October 2, 2002), 67 FR 63180 (October 10, 2002) (extending the pilot through January 31, 2003); 47372 (February 14, 2003), 68 FR 8955 (February 26, 2003) (extending the pilot through May 31, 2003); 47951 (May 30, 2003), 68 FR 34448 (June 9, 2003) (extending the pilot through December 1, 2003); 48871 (December 3, 2003), 68 FR 69097 (December 11, 2003) (extending pilot through June 30, 2004); 49994 (July 9, 2004), 69 FR 42486 (July 15, 2004) (extending pilot through June 30, 2005); and 52326 (August 23, 2005), 70 FR 51394 (August 30, 2005). provide sub-penny price improvement to an inbound order. This proposed rule change would apply only in the Exchange's current trading model. Within the current model, an Exchange specialist (or any market maker handling a customer order) typically would provide sub-penny price improvement to an order either on a manual basis or through an automated pricing mechanism used by specialist firms to process orders that are not automatically executed within the Exchange's systems. The Exchange will re-address issues associated with sub-penny trading as part of the filing the Exchange will make to qualify as an “Automated Trading Center” under Regulation NMS. 9 9 *See* 17 CFR 242.600(b)(4). 2. Statutory Basis The CHX believes the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular, with the requirements of Section 6(b). 10 The Exchange believes that the proposed changes are consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 11 because they would promote just and equitable principles of trade; remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system; and, in general, protect investors and the public interest by permitting trading to occur in sub-penny increments on the Exchange while providing protection to customer orders that are accepted or displayed in penny increments. 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes would impose any burden on competition. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments Regarding the Proposed Rule Changes Received From Members, Participants or Others No written comments were either solicited or received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Changes and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such other 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 self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
(A)By order approve the 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 proposal, 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 No. SR-CHX-2005-36 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 No. SR-CHX-2005-36. 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 will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the CHX. 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 No. SR-CHX-2005-36 and should be submitted on or before January 12, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-7670 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52960; File No. SR-ISE-2005-59] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Expand its $2.50 Strike Price Program December 15, 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 December 13, 2005, the International Securities Exchange, Inc. (“ISE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by ISE. The Exchange has filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it 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)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change ISE proposes to amend ISE Rule 504 pertaining to the $2.50 Strike Price Program (“Program”). Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new language is in *italics* ; proposed deletions are in [brackets]. Rule 504. Series of Options Contracts Open for Trading
(a)through (f)—No change.
(g)*Pursuant to a program initially approved by the SEC in 1995* , [T] *t* he options exchanges may select up to 200 options classes on individual stocks for which the interval of strike prices will be $2.50 where the strike price is greater than $25 but less than $50 ( *the “$2.50 Strike Price Program”* ). *On any option class that has been selected as part of this $2.50 Strike Price Program, $2.50 strike prices between $50 and $75 may be listed, provided that $2.50 strike prices between $50 and $75 are no more than $10 from the closing price of the underlying stock in its primary market on the preceding day. For example, if an options class has been selected as part of the $2.50 Strike Price Program, and the underlying stock closes at $48.50 in its primary market, the Exchange may list the $52.50 strike price and the $57.50 strike price on the next business day. If an underlying security closes at $54, the Exchange may list the $52.50 strike price, the $57.50 strike price and the $62.50 strike price on the next business day* . [The 200 options classes may be selected by the various options exchanges pursuant to any agreement mutually agreed to by the individual exchanges. In addition to those options selected by the Exchange, t] *T* he Exchange may list a strike price interval [may be] of $2.50 in any multiply-traded option once [another exchange trading that option selects such option as part of this program] *an exchange selects an option as part of the $2.50 Price Program* . [The Exchange and any of the other exchanges may also list strike prices of $2.50 on any options class that was previously selected by the NYSE.]
(h)No change. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, ISE 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 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 Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange proposes to amend ISE Rule 504 to allow the listing of options with $2.50 strike price intervals for options with strike prices between $50 and $75 on those option classes that have been selected as part of the Program, provided the $2.50 strike price intervals between $50 and $75 are no more than $10 from the closing price of the underlying stock in its primary market on the preceding day. For example, if an options class has been selected as part of the Program, and the underlying stock closes at $48.50 in its primary market, the Exchange may list options with strike prices of $52.50 and $57.50 on the next business day. If an underlying security closes at $54, the Exchange may list options with strike prices of $52.50, $57.50, and $62.50 on the next business day. The Program was initially adopted in 1995 as a joint pilot program of the options exchanges, whereby the options exchanges were permitted to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals up to $50 on a total of up to 100 option classes. 5 The Program was later expanded and permanently approved in 1998 to allow the options exchanges to select up to 200 classes on which to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals up to $50. 6 Of these 200 options classes eligible for the Program, 60 classes were allocated to the Chicago Board Options Exchange (“CBOE”) and 51 classes were allocated to the American Stock Exchange (“Amex”), all pursuant to a formulae approved by the SEC. Each options exchange, however, is permitted to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals on any option class that another exchange selects as part of the Program. 7 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35993 (July 19, 1995), 60 FR 38073 (July 25, 1995) (approving File Nos. SR-Phlx-95-08, SR-Amex-95-12, SR-PSE-95-07, SR-CBOE-95-19, and SR-NYSE-95-12). 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40662 (November 12, 1998), 63 FR 64297 (November 19, 1998) (approving File Nos. SR-Amex-98-21, SR-CBOE-98-29, SR-PCX-98-31, and SR-Phlx-98-26). 7 The ISE does not select any option classes for inclusion in the Program. The Exchange lists options with $2.50 strike price intervals on those classes selected by the other options exchanges. Telephone conversation between Samir Patel, Assistant General Counsel, ISE, and Theodore S. Venuti, Attorney, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, on December 15, 2005. The Exchange believes that its experiences over the years with the Program have produced positive results. Specifically, the Program has stimulated customer interest by creating additional trading opportunities, by providing more flexibility in trading decisions, and by affording customers the ability to more closely tailor investment strategies to the precise movement of the underlying security. The Exchange's proposal to expand the Program as described in the proposed rule change is intended to provide customers with greater flexibility in their investment choices for those stocks priced between $50 and $75 that have a low volatility and thus trade in a narrow range. The Exchange represents that the Options Price Reporting Authority has the capacity to accommodate the increase in the number of series added pursuant to this rule change. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 8 in general, and furthers the objective of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 9 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of change as well as to protect investors and the public interest, by increasing trading opportunities which should, in turn, increase the depth and liquidity of the marketplace. 10 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 10 The Commission notes that the statutory basis section of Exhibit 1 to the proposed rule change states the incorrect rule amended by the proposal. B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition 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 has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested parties. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the forgoing rule change does not:
(1)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)become operative for 30 days after the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 11 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 12 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 13 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 14 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. 15 The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-operative delay, and the Commission hereby grants that request. 16 The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day pre-operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest. This action will allow the Exchange to immediately expand its Program to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals for options with strike prices between $50 and $75. The Commission notes that it recently approved similar expansions to the $2.50 Strike Price Programs of CBOE and Amex. 17 These proposals were subject to a full notice-and-comment period, and no negative comments were submitted. The Commission does not believe that ISE's proposal raises any novel issues. 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 14 *Id.* 15 In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that the Exchange give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Commission has decided to waive the five-day pre-filing notice requirement. 16 For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day pre-operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 17 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 52892 (December 5, 2005), 70 FR 73492 (December 12, 2005) (approving SR-CBOE-2005-39) and 52893 (December 5, 2005), 70 FR 73488 (December 12, 2005) (approving SR-Amex-2005-067). 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 Act. 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 No. SR-ISE-2005-59 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 No. SR-ISE-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, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of ISE. 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 No. SR-ISE-2005-59 and should be submitted on or before January 12, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 18 Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. 18 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). [FR Doc. E5-7676 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52967; File No. SR-MSRB-2005-16] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change to MSRB Rule G-14 RTRS Procedures, Paragraph (a)(ii)(C) To Extend the Expiration Date of the Three Hour Exception December 16, 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 December 13, 2005, the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (“MSRB” or “Board”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the MSRB. 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. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement Of The Terms Of Substance Of The Proposed Rule Change The MSRB is filing with the Commission a proposed rule change to paragraph (a)(ii)(C) of Rule G-14 RTRS Procedures under Rule G-14 Reports of Sales or Purchases, to extend the expiration date of the three hour exception to the 15 minute reporting deadline. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the MSRB's Web site ( *http://www.msrb.org* ), at the MSRB'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 MSRB included statements concerning the purpose of, and statutory 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 MSRB 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 MSRB Rule G-14 trade reporting procedures require that transactions effected with a time of trade during the hours of the Real-Time Transaction Reporting System (“RTRS”) business day be reported within 15 minutes of the time of trade to an RTRS Portal. Under MSRB Rule G-14, there are three exceptions to this 15 minute reporting requirement. The exception addressed by the proposed rule change allows a dealer three hours to report a security that the dealer has not traded in the previous year. 3 This exception is not available to a managing underwriter or syndicate member. The MSRB included a sunset date of January 31, 2006 for the three hour exception in order to provide incentive for information vendors and the industry to move to real-time techniques for securities master updates. This exception was designed to give a dealer time to add a security to its securities master file so that a trade can be reported through the dealer's automated processing systems. 3 The other two exceptions to the 15 minute reporting rule are:
(1)that syndicate managers, syndicate members and selling group members that effect trades in new issues on the first day of trading at the list offering price are permitted to report these trades by the end of the day on which they were executed; and
(2)that a dealer effecting a trade in a short-term instrument under nine months in effective maturity (including variable rate instruments, auction rate products, and commercial paper) shall report such trades by the end of the business day on which the trades were executed. *See* MSRB Rule G-14 RTRS Procedures (a)(ii)(A), (B). Historically, dealers have not been able to maintain a database of formatted municipal securities information for the full universe of approximately 1.5 million municipal securities due to the cost of mainframe storage. A securities master file contains the information about a municipal security issue that is necessary for a dealer to be able to process transactions in the issue. It includes such items as interest rate, dated date, interest payment cycle, put and call schedules. This data is stored in the dealer's trade processing system in a database commonly called the “securities master file.” 4 The dealer's securities master file sometimes contains information only for securities held in custody for customers and for securities that have been recently traded. In that case, if a dealer trades a secondary market security that is not in its securities master file, the relevant securities information must be obtained from a vendor by the dealer before the trade can be processed. 4 Many dealers use service bureaus for various trade processing functions, including the maintenance of securities master files. Securities master file update procedures for service bureaus and the challenges in moving to a real-time environment for service bureaus are the same as those described for dealers. Since implementation of real-time transaction reporting on January 31, 2005, the municipal securities industry has made some progress in improving timely access to information on municipal securities. Some dealers and service bureaus have elected to store the full universe of municipal securities in their securities master files. In addition, some links have been set up so that dealers are able to obtain a real-time update from a vendor upon request after an issue is traded for the first time. Notwithstanding some progress, dealers have indicated that difficulty continues to exist in ensuring adequate real-time access to securities data for the 1.5 million outstanding municipal securities and are concerned about the upcoming expiration of the three hour exception. This delay in obtaining relevant security information can cause the dealer's trade to be reported as late. The Bond Market Association (“TBMA”) has requested that MSRB extend the three hour exception to provide additional time for the industry to develop solutions to the problems of disseminating municipal securities information. The MSRB believes that the industry can complete the necessary systems changes to address access to securities information in the secondary market by December 29, 2006. The MSRB does not intend to provide any additional extensions beyond this date. This date will allow the municipal securities industry to work on solutions for dealers to obtain municipal securities information in a timely manner from information vendors in order to process trades not in the dealer's securities master file. For new issue transactions, a dealer's access to necessary securities information depends not only on its link with the information vendor but also on whether that vendor itself has the information on the new issue. Vendors currently obtain much of their new issue information through voluntary cooperation from underwriters. This process does not always result in all the vendors having the necessary securities information by the time of formal award when trade executions begin. Dealers trading a new issue for the first time need the three hour exception from the 15 minute trade reporting for their first trades in a new issue because the securities information is not available at the time the trade is executed. 5 The industry has expressed concern that it needs more time to work on the current infrastructure for the collection and dissemination of securities information in order to move towards real-time techniques to update securities master files and thereby allow dealers to report trades within 15 minutes. Accordingly, the MSRB is proposing an extension of the three hour exception for when, as and if issued transactions to December 31, 2007. 5 In the new issue market, information vendors seek to collect information on each issue and deliver it to customers in time for trade reporting in the new issue. There are several challenges for vendors and dealers to meet the reporting deadlines. For example, there are approximately 15,000 new municipal issues that must be set up in databases each month. Another problem for the industry is the fact that approximately 85 different information fields for each issue must be successfully gathered, which in large part depends on the timely cooperation of the underwriters. In addition, in order to expedite the process of moving to real-time techniques for securities master updates by vendors and the industry with a particular emphasis on newly issued securities, TBMA and The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) are currently working on a project that will address inefficiencies in the collection of new information securities data. As proposed, DTC will act as a central collection point for standardized electronic files of new issue information provided by underwriters. DTC then would provide the information in real-time to information vendors. Underwriters would provide the information to DTC on a specific timeframe. This project is scheduled for implementation in the last half of 2007. It will make it possible for dealers to report new issue trades earlier and will eliminate the need for the three hour exception for new issue trades. An extension of the three hour exception for when, as and if issued transactions to December 31, 2007, will also allow time for this project to be implemented and for initial operational details to be addressed before the 15 minute reporting requirement becomes effective for trades that currently qualify for the three hour exception. The proposed rule would revise MSRB Rule G-14 RTRS Procedures (a)(ii)(C) by deleting the language regarding the expiration of the three hour exception on January 31, 2006 and replacing the language to state that for when, as and if issued transactions, the three hour exception to the 15 minute reporting rule will expire on December 31, 2007; and for all other transactions, the exception will expire on December 29, 2006. 2. Statutory Basis The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act, 6 which requires that the rules of the MSRB shall “be 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 regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in municipal securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market in municipal securities, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.* * * ” 7 6 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(C). 7 *Id.* The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act because it will allow for the municipal securities industry to produce increased accurate trade reporting and transparency, and will enhance surveillance data used by enforcement agencies. This proposed rule change will foster cooperation and coordination within the municipal securities industry with the ultimate goal of disseminating accurate real-time pricing data. B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The MSRB does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition since it would apply equally to all brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received on this proposed rule change. III. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the MSRB 8 and, in particular, the requirements of Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder. 9 Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act requires, among other things, that the MSRB's rules be 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 regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in municipal securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market in municipal securities, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 10 8 In a pproving this rule the Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 9 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(C). 10 *Id.* The Commission finds good cause for approving the proposed rule change prior to the 30th day of the date of publication of the notice thereof in the **Federal Register** . The Commission notes that
(i)the three hour exception to the 15-minute transaction reporting will automatically expire on January 31, 2006; and
(ii)the industry needs more time to correct the inadequacies in the current industry infrastructure for collecting and disseminating securities information so as to implement real-time techniques for securities master updates. Therefore, the Commission finds that there is good cause, consistent with Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 11 to approve the proposed change on an accelerated basis. 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(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-MSRB-2005-16 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-MSRB-2005-16. 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 MSRB. 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-MSRB-2005-16 and should be submitted on or before January 12, 2006. 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-7692 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52958; File No. SR-NYSE-2005-73] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange, Inc., Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change to Rule 600, Relating To Arbitration December 15, 2005. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act” or “Act”), 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 3 notice is hereby given that on October 20, 2005, the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (“NYSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed amendments to its arbitration rules as described in Items I and II below, which items have been prepared by the NYSE. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons and is approving the proposal on an accelerated basis. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. 3 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The proposed rule change consists of the rescission of Exchange Rule 600(g), a pilot rule relating to the waiver of the California Ethics Standards for Neutral Arbitrators in Contractual Arbitrations. 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 NYSE included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The NYSE 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 On July 1, 2002, the Exchange suspended the appointment of arbitrators for cases pending in California as a result of the purported application of the Ethics Standards for Neutral Arbitrators in Contractual Arbitrations (the “California Standards”) to Exchange arbitrations and arbitrators. The Exchange proposed Rule 600(g) in response to the purported imposition of California state law on arbitrations conducted under the auspices of the Exchange and pursuant to a set of nationally-applied rules approved by the Commission. 4 Under Rule 600(g), the Exchange implemented a pilot rule whereby parties to an arbitration could in certain circumstances request that a hearing be held outside California or waive application of the California Standards and hold the hearing in California. The Exchange and NASD Dispute Resolution, Inc. (“NASD Dispute Resolution”) became involved in a number of legal actions challenging the California Standards. On March 1, 2005, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a decision in *Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.* v *Grunwald* 5 in which it held that the provisions of the Act preempt application of the California Standards to NASD Dispute Resolution arbitrations. On May 23, 2005, the Supreme Court of California issued a decision in *Jevne* v. *The Superior Court of Los Angeles County* 6 in which it also held that the provisions of the Act preempt application of the California Standards to NASD Dispute Resolution arbitrations. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that it can once again appoint arbitrators and hold hearings in California without requiring a waiver of the California Standards. 4 *See* Exchange Act Release No. 46816 (November 12, 2002); 67 FR 69793 (November 19, 2002) (SR-NYSE-2002-56). 5 400 F.3d 1119 (9th Cir. 2005). 6 S121532 (35 Cal. 4th 935) (CA Sup. Ct. May 23, 2005). The proposed rule change is intended to rescind Rule 600(g), which expired on September 30, 2005, as it is no longer necessary, in light of the court decisions referenced above. 2. Statutory Basis The NYSE believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) 7 of the Act in general and section 6(b)(5) of the Act 8 in particular in that it promotes just and equitable principles of trade by ensuring that members and member organizations and the public have a fair and impartial forum for the resolution of their disputes. 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 NYSE 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 The NYSE has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change The Commission has determined to approve the proposed rule change on an accelerated basis, thereby permitting the Exchange to rescind Rule 600(g) promptly. 9 The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of section 6(b) 10 of the Act in general and section 6(b)(5) of the Act 11 in particular. Specifically, the Commission believes that permitting the Exchange to rescind Rule 600(g) will alleviate any confusion by California claimants as to whether the California Standards are applicable to their claims. The Commission finds good cause for approving the proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after the date of publication of the notice thereof in the **Federal Register** . Although California claimants are no longer required to waive the California Standards, Rule 600(g) might lead California claimants to believe that the California Standards conflict with the NASD Code of Arbitration. Accordingly, the Commission believes that it is consistent with sections 6(b)(5) 12 and 19(b)(2) 13 of the Act to approve the proposed rule change on an accelerated basis. 9 The Exchange requested accelerated approval of the proposed rule change. Conversation between Daniel Beyda, Chief Administrative Officer of NYSE Arbitration, NYSE, and Elizabeth MacDonald, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, on December 15, 2005. 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(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 e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2005-73 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-NYSE-2005-73. 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 NYSE. 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-NYSE-2005-73 and should be submitted on or before January 12, 2006. V. Conclusion *It is Therefore Ordered* , pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act 14 that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2005-73) be, and hereby is, approved. 14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-7674 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52961; File No. SR-Phlx-2005-77] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Expand Its $2.50 Strike Price Program December 15, 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 December 14, 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 and II below, which Items have been prepared by Phlx. The Exchange has filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it 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)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Phlx proposes to amend Commentary .05 to Phlx Rule 1012 (Series of Options Open for Trading) to allow the Exchange to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals for options with strike prices between $50 and $75. Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new language is in *italics* ; proposed deletions are in [brackets]. Rule 1012. Series of Options Open for Trading (a)—(d) No Change. Commentary: .01 through .04—No Change. .05 (a)—No Change.
(b)*Pursuant to a program initially approved by the SEC in 1995* , [T] *t* he Exchange may select up to [a specified number of its listed] *46* options *classes* on individual stocks for which the interval of strike prices will be $2.50 where the strike price is greater than $25 but less than $50 ( *the “$2.50 Strike Price Program”* ). In addition to those options selected by the Exchange, the strike price interval may be $2.50 in any multiply-traded option once another exchange trading that option selects such option, as part of this program. *(i) In addition, on any option class that has been selected as part of the $2.50 Strike Price Program pursuant to paragraph
(b)above, the Exchange may list $2.50 strike prices between $50 and $75, provided the $2.50 strike prices between $50 and $75 are no more than $10 from the closing price of the underlying stock in its primary market on the preceding day. For example, if an option class has been selected as part of the $2.50 Strike Price Program, and the underlying stock closes at $48.50 in its primary market, the Exchange may list the $52.50 strike price and the $57.50 strike price on the next business day. If an underlying security closes at $54, the Exchange may list the $52.50 strike price, the $57.50 strike price and the $62.50 strike price on the next business day.* *(ii) An option class shall remain in the $2.50 Strike Price Program until otherwise designated by the Exchange and a decertification notice is sent to the Options Clearing Corporation.* II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, Phlx 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 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 Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of the proposal is to amend Commentary .05 to Phlx Rule 1012 to expand the current $2.50 Strike Price Program (“Program”) for individual equity options to permit the listing of options with $2.50 strike price intervals for options with strike prices between $50 and $75, provided the $2.50 strike price intervals are no more than $10 from the closing price of the underlying stock in its primary market 5 on the preceding day. In addition, the proposed rule change clarifies that an option class will remain in the Program until the Exchange otherwise designates and sends a decertification notice to the Options Clearing Corporation. 5 The term “primary market” is defined in Phlx Rule 1000 in respect of an underlying stock or exchange-traded fund share as the principal market in which the underlying stock or exchange-traded fund share is traded. Pursuant to the proposed rule change, for example, if an option class has been selected as part of the Program, and the underlying stock closed at $48.50 in its primary market, the Exchange may list options with strike prices of $52.50 and $57.50 on the next business day; and if an underlying security closed at $54, the Exchange may list options with strike prices of $52.50, $57.50, and $62.50 on the next business day. The current Program is set forth in Commentary .05 to Phlx Rule 1012. The Program permits the Exchange to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals for selected options trading at strike prices greater than $25 but less than $50, excluding LEAPS. Initially adopted in 1995 as a pilot program, the options exchanges at that time were permitted to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals up to $50 on a total of up to 100 option classes. 6 In 1998, the pilot program was expanded and permanently approved to allow the options exchanges collectively to select up to 200 option classes on which to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals up to $50. 7 Of the current 200 options classes eligible for the Program, 46 have been allocated to Phlx. 8 In addition, each options exchange is permitted to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals on any option class that another options exchange selects under its Program. 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35993 (July 19, 1995), 60 FR 38073 (July 25, 1995) (approving File Nos. SR-Phlx-95-08, SR-Amex-95-12, SR-PSE-95-07, SR-CBOE-95-19, and SR-NYSE-95-12). 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40662 (November 12, 1998), 63 FR 64297 (November 19, 1998) (approving File Nos. SR-Amex-98-21, SR-CBOE-98-29, SR-PCX-98-31, and SR-Phlx-98-26). 8 The Exchange notes that the allocation is not changed by this proposal. The Exchange believes that the Program has created additional trading opportunities for customers benefiting the marketplace. The existence of $2.50 strike price intervals affords customers the ability to more closely tailor investment strategies to the precise movement of the underlying security. Accordingly, Phlx believes that the proposal to expand the Program to allow the listing of options with $2.50 strike price intervals for options with strike prices between $50 and $75 should further benefit customers and the market by providing greater trading opportunities for those underlying stocks that have low volatility and thus trade in a narrow range. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act, 9 in general, and furthers the objective of section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 10 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of change, 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. 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition 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 No written comments were either solicited or received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the forgoing rule change does not:
(1)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)become operative for 30 days after the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 11 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 12 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 13 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 14 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. 15 The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-operative delay, and the Commission hereby grants that request. 16 The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day pre-operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest. This action will allow the Exchange to immediately expand its Program to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals for options with strike prices between $50 and $75. The Commission notes that it recently approved similar expansions to the $2.50 Strike Price Programs of the Chicago Board Options Exchange (“CBOE”) and the American Stock Exchange (“Amex”). 17 These proposals were subject to a full notice-and- comment period, and no negative comments were submitted. The Commission does not believe that Phlx's proposal raises any novel issues. 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 14 *Id* . 15 In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that the Exchange give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Commission has decided to waive the five-day pre-filing notice requirement. 16 For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day pre-operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 17 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 52892 (December 5, 2005), 70 FR 73492 (December 12, 2005) (approving SR-CBOE-2005-39) and 52893 (December 5, 2005), 70 FR 73488 (December 12, 2005) (approving SR-Amex-2005-067). 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 Act. 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 No. SR-Phlx-2005-77 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 No. SR-Phlx-2005-77. 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, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of Phlx. 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 No. SR-Phlx-005-77 and should be submitted on or before January 12, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 18 18 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-7691 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5253] Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs; Request for Grant Proposals: Summer Institute for English as a Foreign Language Administrator from Francophone and Lusophone Sub-Saharan Africa *Announcement Type:* New Cooperative Agreement. *Funding Opportunity Number:* ECA/A/E/AF-06-01. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:* 00.000. *Key Dates:* June 1, 2006-December 15, 2006. *Application Deadline:* February 13, 2006. SUMMARY: The African Programs Branch (ECA/A/E/AF), Office of Academic Exchange Programs of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs announces an open competition for the 2006 Summer Institute for English as a Foreign Language
(EFL)Administrators from Francophone and Lusophone Sub-Saharan Africa. Accredited, post-secondary U.S. educational institutions may submit proposals to administer a U.S.-based six-week program in educational management, teacher-training, materials development and organizational skills for 16 secondary school EFL supervisors/inspectors and school administrators with strong EFL backgrounds selected from French and Portuguese-speaking countries of Sub-Saharan Africa. The Bureau anticipates providing one assistance award to support this program. I. Funding Opportunity Description *Authority:* Overall grant making authority for this program is contained in the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, Public Law 87-256, as amended, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the Act is “to enable the Government of the United States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries * * *; to strengthen the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of the people of the United States and other nations * * * and thus to assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic and peaceful relations between the United States and the other countries of the world.” The funding authority for the program above is provided through legislation. *Purpose:* The general objective of the Institute is to support and encourage the upgrading of English language programs in secondary schools in French and Portuguese-speaking African countries by enhancing participants' educational management, teacher-training, EFL materials development and organizational skills as well as broadening their understanding of U.S. institutions and culture. American institutions of higher education having experience in the field of English as a Second Language
(ESL)or English as a Foreign Language (EFL), ESL/EFL materials development and teacher training/assessment may apply to develop, administer, and provide follow-up to the six-week summer program. *Guidelines:* The proposal should be designed to support the following specific activities:
(a)A five-week academic program with emphasis on developing the capacities of 16 Sub-Saharan African secondary school supervisors/inspectors/administrators to strengthen EFL programs through the design and delivery of more effective teacher-training, use of technology to access and develop teaching materials, and conducting teacher assessment.
(b)Structured cultural activities planned within the five-week academic program to facilitate interaction among the African participants, American students, faculty, administrators, and the local community to promote mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of African countries.
(c)One-week of escorted, cultural and educational meetings and site visits in Washington, DC, complementing and reinforcing the academic program. The site visits will include a meeting at the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs.
(d)The creation of a website and a listserv to facilitate follow-on mentoring/participant networking concerning final project implementation and to continue a dialog on ideas developed during the Institute.
(e)Assistance to participants to select, purchase and ship professional materials to use in follow-on activities and training projects in their home countries.
(f)One post-Institute visit to the region by the Institute director or an Institute faculty member to visit one to three participant home workplace(s). The purpose of the visit will be to observe final project follow-on and implementation, and to identify appropriate adjustments to future Institute curricula to better meet participant needs. The five-week academic program should include a variety of formats such as discussion sessions, lectures, group work, workshops that may include practice with peers, field trips, and professional shadowing. Lectures and presentations on educational management/organization theory should be kept to a minimum. The emphasis should be on developing practical skills and approaches/solutions to real problems/conditions identified by the participants. A successful program design would create an atmosphere where both participants and facilitators are recognized for their expertise and work together toward the overarching goal of improving English language programs in participants' countries. Five specific areas to address in the academic program follow: 1. Training EFL teaching staff: Supporting, motivating teachers and assessing teachers; designing and conducting in-service training programs; building staff cohesiveness. 2. Classroom culture: Creating a school culture conducive to learning, setting behavioral/learning standards, nurturing active student participation, evaluating student progress, fostering parental involvement. 3. Identifying, creating and managing resources: Conducting resource inventories, allocating/tracking resources, budgeting, optimizing limited resources, accessing outside resources. 4. Education Technology: Introduction and/or enrichment of computer-based word processing and appropriate software for participants who lack these skills, introduction to computer networks for EFL professionals, introduction to/ enrichment of knowledge of e-mail and the Internet as pedagogic and research tools. 5. Cultural Activity: The cultural activity program should take advantage of the diversity of the people, places, and events in the local community and/or in nearby cities to enhance participants' experience of American life and culture. The Washington, DC, educational site visit should be planned, arranged, and conducted by the grantee organization Summer Institute Program Director. The visit is an integral part of the program, complementing and reinforcing the academic portion. Programming in Washington should begin with a briefing session at the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. ECA/A/E/AF suggests visits with ESL administrators and/or ESL teachers in the greater Washington, DC, vicinity and the national TESOL headquarters located in Alexandria, Virginia. The Washington visit offers an opportunity to explore local museums and attend at least one evening cultural event. Pending availability of FY 2006 funds, the Institute activities should begin on or about June 12, 2006 with follow-up activities to end before December 15, 2006. Programs must comply with J-1 visa regulations. Please refer to the Solicitation Package for further information. *Program Administration:* All Summer Institute programming and administrative logistics, management of the academic program and the educational tour, and on-site arrangements will be the responsibility of the grantee organization. The ECA program officer will serve as a resource for Washington, DC, lodging, activities, and transportation options. The grantee organization is responsible for arrangements for lodging, food, maintenance and local travel for participants while in the U.S. The grantee organization should balance cost-effectiveness in accommodations and meal plans with flexibility for differing diets and personal habits among the participants. Single rooms or housing in residential suites, which offer privacy, are preferable. The project will provide each participant with a supplemental book allowance of $150 per person. The grantee organization should assist participants in selection, acquisition and shipment of materials to their home countries. The grantee organization should also arrange for institutional or publishers' discounts for participants, as possible. Proposals should describe the available health care system and the plan to provide health care access to Institute participants. The Department of State will provide limited health insurance coverage to all participants. *Participant Selection:* Participants will be selected by the Bureau based on nominations from U.S. Embassies. Minimum qualifications for all participants will be:
(1)Adequate proficiency in English to allow full participation in and benefit from the program;
(2)the equivalent of BA/BS degrees from their national education systems;
(3)three years EFL teaching experience; and
(4)job responsibilities related to teacher training and school/program administration. Participants will enter the United States on J-visas, using DS-2019 forms issued by ECA. *Orientation:* The grantee organization will provide general pre-departure orientation materials for all participants prior to their travel to the United States. This material should include a tentative program outline with suggested goals and objectives for participants, relevant background information about the grantee organization and individuals involved in the project, and information concerning arrival in the host city, local housing, climate, and available services at the host institution. *Needs Assessment:* The U.S. institution should conduct an initial needs assessment of participants upon arrival and be prepared to adjust program emphasis as necessary to respond to participants' concerns in the area of EFL education. *Cooperative Agreement:* In a cooperative agreement, ECA/A/E/AF is substantially involved in program activities above and beyond routine grant monitoring. ECA/A/E/AF activities and responsibilities for this program are as follows: • Participants will be selected by the Bureau based on nominations from U.S. Embassies. • Participants will enter the United States on J-visas, using DS-2019 forms issued by ECA. • ECA/A/E/AF will arrange participants' international travel. Air travel to Washington, DC from the host city can be included in the international ticket of each participant if air travel for this leg of the program is appropriate. • ECA/A/E/AF will facilitate sending pre-arrival orientation materials electronically to participants via U.S. embassy staff. ECA/A/E/AF will provide the host institution with participants' curricula vitae and travel itineraries and will be available to offer guidance throughout the Institute. Staff of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs will brief the participants during their visit to Washington, DC. *Proposal Contents:* Applicants should submit a complete and thorough proposal describing the program in a convincing and comprehensive manner. Since there is no opportunity for applicants to meet with reviewing officials, the proposal should respond to the criteria set forth in the solicitation and other guidelines as clearly as possible. The proposal should address succinctly, but completely, the elements described below and must follow all format requirements. The proposal should include the following items: TAB A—SF-424, “Application for Federal Assistance” TAB B—Executive Summary In one double-spaced page, provide the following information about the project: 1. Name of organization/participating institutions. 2. Beginning and ending dates of the program. 3. Proposed theme. 4. Nature of activity. 5. Funding level requested from the Bureau, total program cost, total cost-sharing from the applicant and other sources. 6. Scope and goals: Include
(a)the number and description of participants;
(b)describe the wider audience benefiting from the program (overall impact);
(c)Geographic diversity of program, both in the U.S. and overseas;
(d)fields covered;
(e)anticipated results (short and long term). TAB C—Narrative and Calendar of Activities Provide a detailed description of the project addressing the areas listed below. 1. Vision (statement of need, objectives, goals, benefits). 2. Participating Organizations. 3. Program Activities (orientation, academic component, cultural program, participant monitoring). 4. Program Evaluation. 5. Follow-on activities and visit to home work site(s) of selected participants. 6. Project Management. 7. Work Plan/Time Frame. Please refer to the Proposal Submission Instruction
(PSI)document for technical format and instructions. TAB D—Budget Submission The cost to the Bureau for the Summer Institute for English as a Foreign Language Administrators from Francophone and Lusophone Sub-Saharan Africa should not exceed $145,000. The budget should be developed for 16 participants. Please see Section IV.3e and the Guidelines for Assistance Award Proposals and Budget Guidelines in Proposal Submission Instructions
(PSI)in regard to a Summary Budget and a detailed Line-Item Budget. Use notes where further explanation of line items is required to clarify how the figures were derived. TAB E—Letters of Endorsement and Resumés Resumés of all program staff should be included in the submission. No resumé should exceed two pages. TAB F—SF-424B “Assurances-Nonconstruction Programs” First time applicant organizations and organizations which have not received an assistance award (grant or cooperative agreement) from the Bureau during the past three
(3)years, must submit as an attachment to this form the following:
(a)One copy of their Charter or Articles of Incorporation;
(b)A list of the current Board of Directors; and
(c)current financial statements. Include other attachments, if applicable. II. Award Information *Type of Award:* Cooperative Agreement. ECA's level of involvement in this program is listed under number I above. *Fiscal Year Funds:* 2006. *Approximate Total Funding:* $145,000. *Approximate Number of Awards:* 1. *Approximate Average Award:* $145,000. *Anticipated Award Date:* June 1, 2006. *Anticipated Project Completion Date:* December 15, 2006. *Additional Information:* Pending successful implementation of this program and the availability of funds in subsequent fiscal years, it is ECA's intent to renew this grant for two additional fiscal years, before openly competing it again. III. Eligibility Information III.1. Eligible Applicants Applications may be submitted by public and private non-profit organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3). III.2. Cost Sharing or Matching Funds There is no minimum or maximum percentage required for this competition. However, the Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs. When cost sharing is offered, it is understood and agreed that the applicant must provide the amount of cost sharing as stipulated in its proposal and later included in an approved grant agreement. Cost sharing may be in the form of allowable direct or indirect costs. For accountability, you must maintain written records to support all costs that are claimed as your contribution, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal government. Such records are subject to audit. The basis for determining the value of cash and in-kind contributions must be in accordance with OMB Circular A-110, (Revised), Subpart C.23—Cost Sharing and Matching. In the event you do not provide the minimum amount of cost sharing as stipulated in the approved budget, ECA's contribution will be reduced in like proportion. III.3. Other Eligibility Requirements Bureau grant guidelines require that organizations with less than four years experience in conducting international exchanges be limited to $60,000 in Bureau funding. ECA anticipates awarding one grant, in an amount up to $145,000 to support program and administrative costs required to implement this exchange program. Therefore, organizations with less than four years experience in conducting international exchanges are ineligible to apply under this competition. IV. Application and Submission Information Note: Please read the complete announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. IV.1. Contact Information To Request an Application Package Please contact the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, ECA/A/E/AF, Room 232, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, telephone
(202)453-8118 and fax number
(202)453-8121, or email *kepetsdm@state.gov* to request a Solicitation Package. Please specify Dawn Kepets and refer to the Funding Opportunity Number ECA/A/E/AF-06-01 located at the top of this announcement when making your request or on all other inquiries or correspondence. The Solicitation Package contains the Proposal Submission Instruction
(PSI)document that consists of required application forms, and standard guidelines for proposal preparation. IV.2. To Download a Solicitation Package Via Internet The entire Solicitation Package may be downloaded from the Bureau's Web site at *http://exchanges.state.gov/education/rfgps/menu.htm* , or from the Grants.gov Web site at *http://www.grants.gov.* Please read all information before downloading. IV.3. Content and Form of Submission Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. The application should be sent per the instructions under IV.3f. Application Deadline and Methods of Submission below. IV.3a. You are required to have a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number to apply for a grant or cooperative agreement from the U.S. Government. This number is a nine-digit identification number, which uniquely identifies business entities. Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. To obtain a DUNS number, access *http://www.dunandbradstreet.com* or call 1-866-705-5711. Please ensure that your DUNS number is included in the appropriate box of the SF—424 which is part of the formal application package. IV.3b. All proposals must contain an executive summary, proposal narrative and budget. Please Refer to the Solicitation Package. It contains the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions
(PSI)document for additional formatting and technical requirements. IV.3c. You must have nonprofit status with the IRS at the time of application. If your organization is a private nonprofit which has not received a grant or cooperative agreement from ECA in the past three years, or if your organization received nonprofit status from the IRS within the past four years, you must submit the necessary documentation to verify nonprofit status as directed in the PSI document. Failure to do so will cause your proposal to be declared technically ineligible. IV.3d. Please take into consideration the following information when preparing your proposal narrative: IV.3d.1. Adherence to All Regulations Governing The J Visa The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs is placing renewed emphasis on the secure and proper administration of Exchange Visitor (J visa) Programs and adherence by grantees and sponsors to all regulations governing the J visa. Therefore, proposals should demonstrate the applicant's capacity to meet all requirements governing the administration of the Exchange Visitor Programs as set forth in 22 CFR part 62, including the oversight of Responsible Officers and Alternate Responsible Officers, screening and selection of program participants, provision of pre-arrival information and orientation to participants, monitoring of participants, proper maintenance and security of forms, record-keeping, reporting and other requirements. ECA will be responsible for issuing DS-2019 forms to participants in this program. A copy of the complete regulations governing the administration of Exchange Visitor
(J)programs is available at *http://exchanges.state.gov* or from: United States Department of State, Office of Exchange Coordination and Designation, ECA/EC/ECD—SA-44, Room 734, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, Telephone:
(202)203-5029, FAX:
(202)453-8640. Please refer to Solicitation Package for further information. IV.3d.2. Diversity, Freedom and Democracy Guidelines Pursuant to the Bureau's authorizing legislation, programs must maintain a non-political character and should be balanced and representative of the diversity of American political, social, and cultural life. “Diversity” should be interpreted in the broadest sense and encompass differences including, but not limited to ethnicity, race, gender, religion, geographic location, socio-economic status, and physical challenges. Applicants are strongly encouraged to adhere to the advancement of this principle both in program administration and in program content. Please refer to the review criteria under the “Support for Diversity” section for specific suggestions on incorporating diversity into your proposal. Public Law 104-319 provides that “in carrying out programs of educational and cultural exchange in countries whose people do not fully enjoy freedom and democracy,” the Bureau “shall take appropriate steps to provide opportunities for participation in such programs to human rights and democracy leaders of such countries.” Public Law 106-113 requires that the governments of the countries described above do not have inappropriate influence in the selection process. Proposals should reflect advancement of these goals in their program contents, to the full extent deemed feasible. IV.3d.3. Program Monitoring and Evaluation Proposals must include a plan to monitor and evaluate the project's success, both as the activities unfold and at the end of the program. The Bureau recommends that your proposal include a draft survey questionnaire or other technique plus a description of a methodology to use to link outcomes to original project objectives. The Bureau expects that the grantee will track participants or partners and be able to respond to key evaluation questions, including satisfaction with the program, learning as a result of the program, changes in behavior as a result of the program, and effects of the program on institutions (institutions in which participants work or partner institutions). The evaluation plan should include indicators that measure gains in mutual understanding as well as substantive knowledge. Successful monitoring and evaluation depend heavily on setting clear goals and outcomes at the outset of a program. Your evaluation plan should include a description of your project's objectives, your anticipated project outcomes, and how and when you intend to measure these outcomes (performance indicators). The more that outcomes are “smart” (specific, measurable, attainable, results-oriented, and placed in a reasonable time frame), the easier it will be to conduct the evaluation. You should also show how your project objectives link to the goals of the program described in this RFGP. Your monitoring and evaluation plan should clearly distinguish between program outputs and outcomes. Outputs are products and services delivered, often stated as an amount. Output information is important to show the scope or size of project activities, but it cannot substitute for information about progress towards outcomes or the results achieved. Examples of outputs include the number of people trained or the number of seminars conducted. Outcomes, in contrast, represent specific results a project is intended to achieve and is usually measured as an extent of change. Findings on outputs and outcomes should both be reported, but the focus should be on outcomes. We encourage you to assess the following four levels of outcomes, as they relate to the program goals set out in the RFGP (listed here in increasing order of importance): 1. Participant satisfaction with the program and exchange experience. 2. Participant learning, such as increased knowledge, aptitude, skills, and changed understanding and attitude. Learning includes both substantive (subject-specific) learning and mutual understanding. 3. Participant behavior, concrete actions to apply knowledge in work or community; greater participation and responsibility in civic organizations; interpretation and explanation of experiences and new knowledge gained; continued contacts between participants, community members, and others. 4. Institutional changes, such as increased collaboration and partnerships, policy reforms, new programming, and organizational improvements. Please note: Consideration should be given to the appropriate timing of data collection for each level of outcome. For example, satisfaction is usually captured as a short-term outcome, whereas behavior and institutional changes are normally considered longer-term outcomes. Overall, the quality of your monitoring and evaluation plan will be judged on how well it
(1)specifies intended outcomes;
(2)gives clear descriptions of how each outcome will be measured;
(3)identifies when particular outcomes will be measured; and
(4)provides a clear description of the data collection strategies for each outcome (i.e., surveys, interviews, or focus groups). (Please note that evaluation plans that deal only with the first level of outcomes [satisfaction] will be deemed less competitive under the present evaluation criteria.) Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. IV.3d.4. Describe Your Plans for Overall Program Management, Staffing and Coordination with ECA/A/E/AF ECA/A/E/AF considers program management, staffing and coordination with the Department of State essential elements of your program. Please give sufficient attention to these elements in your proposal. Please refer to the Technical Eligibility Requirements in the Solicitation package for specific quidelines. IV.3e. Please take the following information into consideration when preparing your budget: IV.3e.1. Applicants must submit a comprehensive budget for the entire program. Awards may not exceed $145,000. There must be a summary budget as well as breakdowns reflecting both administrative and program budgets. Applicants may provide separate sub-budgets for each program component, phase, location, or activity to provide clarification. Proposals should maximize cost-sharing in all facets of the program and to stimulate U.S. private sector, including foundation and corporate, support. Applicants must submit a comprehensive budget for the entire program. The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and availability of U.S. government funding. IV.3e.2. Allowable costs for the program include the following: 1. Instructional costs (for example: instructors' salaries, honoraria for outside speakers, educational course materials); 2. Lodging, meals, and incidentals for participants; 3. Expenses associated with cultural activities planned for the group of participants (for example: tickets, transportation); 4. Administrative costs as necessary; 5. U.S. ground transportation costs to U.S. appointments, meetings and to/from airports. Please refer to the Solicitation Package for complete budget guidelines and formatting instructions. IV.3e.3. Divide the line-item budget into *Program* and *Administration* sections. The line-item budget should include and elaborate on the categories listed below. *Program Costs:* The Institution may choose to itemize academic program costs or set a fee per participant. The following may be included as itemized instruction costs: a. Instructors' salaries as appropriate. Salaries, benefits, and services for instructors' salaries for the Institute classes. Identify each position and provide position title, role in the Institute, and, as appropriate, annual salary and percent of effort used for the Institute. Benefits costs should be stated separately from salary costs. Identify how benefits and services were computed. b. Honoraria and per diem for outside speakers, if any. List names and amounts. c. Film and video rentals, educational materials, curricular needs (i.e., texts, course packs for classes) as needed. If the institution chooses to budget instruction costs as a fee per participant, please state what services are provided within that fee, and only actual costs incurred are chargeable to the award. Clearly indicate the unit cost for each item listed below: 1. Lodging. Housing may be in graduate dormitories, faculty residence, or other, as appropriate. Single rooms are preferred. 2. Meals. Meals may be provided through cash subsistence payments to participants, cafeteria meal plans, or a combination of both. If using a meal plan exclusively, show clearly how the cost of meals will be covered if participants travel away from campus or campus cafeterias are closed. 3. Incidentals allowance. Include an incidentals allowance of $15 per person per day for the full number of days of the summer Institute at the host institution. 4. Supplemental book allowance of $150 per person. 5. Return shipping allowance $150 per person. 6. Lodging, meals and incidentals allowances for participants who must arrive before the Institute formally begins and/or depart after the Institute formally ends, due to airline schedules in their home countries. To estimate costs, multiply daily cost per grantee (include housing, meals and incidentals allowance) by 4 days each by 4 participants. Note: Per diem rate for lodging and meals may not exceed published U.S. government allowance rates for the site of the Institute. Applicants may use per diem rates that are lower than official government rates. Cultural activities and other program costs may include the following: 1. Cultural activities: Entrance fees, overnight lodging, and meals not previously listed. 2. Costs for Washington cultural and educational tour: Include participant lodging (double rooms are acceptable); meals for participants; incidentals allowance for participants ($15 per person per day incidentals allowance for full number of days in Washington). Include $130 for incidental expenses for Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs meeting in Washington, DC. 3. Transportation: Ground transportation for group cultural and educational activities; ground transportation for airport arrivals and departures. Note: The Bureau will provide round-trip international air tickets (from home country to Institute site, to Washington, DC., if appropriate, and return to home country) for participants. The cost of airline travel for participants is not needed in the budget. 4. Per diem (or lodging and subsistence) and travel for grantee escort staff for overnight cultural activities and Washington, DC, visit. Note: Per diem rate for lodging and meals may not exceed published U.S. government allowance rates for the site of the Institute. Institutions may use per diem rates that are lower than official government rates. 5. Costs associated with post-institute implementation/evaluation site visit to Africa. Administration Costs should include the following: A. Staff requirements. B. Benefits. C. Other directly administrative expenses. D. Indirect expenses. Please review carefully the Guidelines for Assistance Award Proposals and Budget Guidelines in Proposal Submission Instructions
(PSI)for descriptions and limitations for each type of administrative cost. IV.3f. Application Deadline and Methods of Submission: *Application Deadline Date:* February 13, 2006. *Reference Number:* ECA/A/E/AF-06-01. *Methods of Submission:* Applications may be submitted in one of two ways: (1.) In hard-copy, via a nationally recognized overnight delivery service (i.e., DHL, Federal Express, UPS, Airborne Express, or U.S. Postal Service Express Overnight Mail, etc.), or (2.) Electronically through *http://www.grants.gov.* Along with the Project Title, all applicants must enter the above Reference Number in Box 11 on the SF-424 contained in the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions
(PSI)of the solicitation document. IV.3f.1 Submitting Printed Applications Applications must be shipped no later than the above deadline. Delivery services used by applicants must have in-place, centralized shipping identification and tracking systems that may be accessed via the Internet and delivery people who are identifiable by commonly recognized uniforms and delivery vehicles. Proposals shipped on or before the above deadline but received at ECA more than seven days after the deadline will be ineligible for further consideration under this competition. Proposals shipped after the established deadlines are ineligible for consideration under this competition. ECA will not notify you upon receipt of application. It is each applicant's responsibility to ensure that each package is marked with a legible tracking number and to monitor/confirm delivery to ECA via the Internet. Delivery of proposal packages may not be made via local courier service or in person for this competition. Faxed documents will not be accepted at any time. Only proposals submitted as stated above will be considered. Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. Important note: When preparing your submission please make sure to include one extra copy of the completed SF-424 form and place it in an envelope addressed to “ECA/EX/PM”. Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. The original and eight copies of the application should be sent to: U.S. Department of State, SA-44, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Ref.: ECA/A/E/AF-06-01, Program Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 534, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547. IV.3f.2—Submitting Electronic Applications Applicants have the option of submitting proposals electronically through Grants.gov ( *http://www.grants.gov* ). Complete solicitation packages are available at Grants.gov in the “Find” portion of the system. Please follow the instructions available in the ‘Get Started' portion of the site ( *http://www.grants.gov/GetStarted* ). Applicants have until midnight (12 a.m.) of the closing date to ensure that their entire applications have been uploaded to the grants.gov site. Applications uploaded to the site after midnight of the application deadline date will be automatically rejected by the grants.gov system, and will be technically ineligible. Applicants will receive a confirmation e-mail from grants.gov upon the successful submission of an application. ECA will not notify you upon receipt of electronic applications. IV.3g. Intergovernmental Review of Applications: Executive Order 12372 does not apply to this program. V. Application Review Information V.1. Review Process The Bureau will review all proposals for technical eligibility. Proposals will be deemed ineligible if they do not fully adhere to the guidelines stated herein and in the Solicitation Package. All eligible proposals will be reviewed by the program office, as well as the Public Diplomacy section overseas, where appropriate. Eligible proposals will be subject to compliance with Federal and Bureau regulations and guidelines and forwarded to Bureau grant panels for advisory review. Proposals may also be reviewed by the Office of the Legal Adviser or by other Department elements. Final funding decisions are at the discretion of the Department of State's Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final technical authority for assistance awards cooperative agreements resides with the Bureau's Grants Officer. Review Criteria Technically eligible applications will be competitively reviewed according to the criteria stated below. These criteria are not rank ordered and all carry equal weight in the proposal evaluation: 1. Quality of the program conceptualization and planning: Proposals should exhibit originality, substance, precision, and relevance to the Bureau's mission of mutual understanding as well as adherence to all guidelines, goals and objectives described in the RFGP. The proposal should demonstrate effective use of community and regional resources to enhance the educational and cultural experiences of the participants. A relevant work plan and detailed calendar should demonstrate substantive undertakings and logistical capacity. 2. Institutional Capacity: Proposed personnel and institutional resources should be adequate and appropriate to achieve a substantive academic program and effective cross-cultural communication with Francophone and Lusophone African participants. Proposals should demonstrate an institutional record of successful exchange programs, including responsible fiscal management and full compliance with all reporting requirements for past Bureau grants. The proposal should show evidence of the applicant's strong on-site administrative capabilities with specific discussion of how logistical arrangements will be undertaken. 3. Multiplier effect/impact: Proposed programs should strengthen long-term mutual understanding, including maximum sharing of information and establishment of long-term institutional and individual linkages. 4. Support of Diversity: Proposals should demonstrate substantive support of the Bureau's policy on diversity. Program administrators should strive for diversity among Institute staff, university students, the host community who interact with participants, and the cultural component of the program. 5. Follow-on Activities: Proposals should provide a plan for continued follow-on activity (without Bureau support) ensuring that Bureau supported programs are not isolated events. 6. Project Evaluation: Proposals should include a plan to evaluate the activity's success, both as the activities unfold and at the conclusion of the program. A draft survey questionnaire or other technique plus description of a methodology to use to link outcomes to original project objectives are recommended. 7. Cost-effectiveness: The overhead and administrative components of the proposal, including salaries and honoraria, should be kept as low as possible. All other items should be necessary and appropriate. 8. Cost-sharing: Proposals should maximize cost-sharing through other private sector support as well as institutional direct funding contributions. VI. Award Administration Information VI.1a. Award Notices Final awards cannot be made until funds have been appropriated by Congress, allocated and committed through internal Bureau procedures. Successful applicants will receive an Assistance Award Document
(AAD)from the Bureau's Grants Office. The AAD and the original grant proposal with subsequent modifications (if applicable) shall be the only binding authorizing document between the recipient and the U.S. Government. The AAD will be signed by an authorized Grants Officer, and mailed to the recipient's responsible officer identified in the application. Unsuccessful applicants will receive notification of the results of the application review from the ECA program office coordinating this competition. VI.2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements Terms and Conditions for the Administration of ECA agreements include the following: Office of Management and Budget Circular A-122, “Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations.” Office of Management and Budget Circular A-21, “Cost Principles for Educational Institutions.” OMB Circular A-87, “Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Governments.” OMB Circular No. A-110 (Revised), Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Nonprofit Organizations. OMB Circular No. A-102, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants-in-Aid to State and Local Governments. OMB Circular No. A-133, Audits of States, Local Government, and Non-profit Organizations. Please reference the following websites for additional information: *http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants.* *http://exchanges.state.gov/education/grantsdiv/terms.htm#articleI* VI.3. Reporting Requirements You must provide ECA with a hard copy original plus two copies of the following reports:
(1)A final program and financial report no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award. Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. (Please refer to IV. Application and Submission Instructions (IV.3.d.3) above for Program Monitoring and Evaluation information. All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. All reports must be sent to the ECA Grants Officer and ECA Program Officer listed in the final assistance award document. VI.4. Program Data Requirements Organizations awarded grants will be required to maintain specific data on program participants and activities in an electronically accessible database format that can be shared with the Bureau as required. As a minimum, the data must include the following:
(1)Name, address, contact information and biographic sketch of all persons who travel internationally on funds provided by the grant or who benefit from the grant funding but do not travel.
(2)Itineraries of international and domestic travel, providing dates of travel and cities in which any exchange experiences take place. Final schedules for in-country and U.S. activities must be received by the ECA Program Officer at least three work days prior to the official opening of the activity. VII. Agency Contacts For questions about this announcement, contact: Dawn Kepets, African Programs Branch, ECA/A/E/AF, Room 232, ECA/A/E/AF-06-01, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, telephone: 202-453-8118 or fax: 202-453-8121 or email: *kepetsdm@state.gov.* All correspondence with the Bureau concerning this RFGP should reference the above title and number ECA/A/E/AF-06-01. Please read the complete **Federal Register** announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. VIII. Other Information *Notice:* The terms and conditions published in this RFGP are binding and may not be modified by any Bureau representative. Explanatory information provided by the Bureau that contradicts published language will not be binding. Issuance of the RFGP does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government. The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and the availability of funds. Awards made will be subject to periodic reporting and evaluation requirements per section VI.3 above. Dated: December 15, 2005. C. Miller Crouch, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E5-7718 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Maritime Administration Reports, Forms and Recordkeeping Requirements; Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review AGENCY: Maritime Administration, DOT. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information Collection abstracted below has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval. The nature of the information collection is described as well as its expected burden. The **Federal Register** Notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on the following collection of information was published on October 11, 2005, and comments were due by December 12, 2005. No comments were received. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before January 23, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Christensen, Maritime Administration, 400 Seventh Street Southwest, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: 202-366-5909; FAX: 202-493-2180; or e-mail: *tom.christensen@dot.gov* . Copies of this collection also can be obtained from that office. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Maritime Administration (MARAD). *Title:* Effective U.S. Control (EUSC)/Parent Company. *OMB Control Number:* 2133-0511. *Type of Request:* Extension of currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* U.S. citizens who own foreign-registered vessels. *Forms:* None. *Abstract:* The Effective U.S. Control
(EUSC)Parent Company collection consists of an inventory of foreign-registered vessels owned by U.S. citizens. Specifically, the collection consists of responses from vessel owners verifying or correcting vessel ownership data and characteristics found in commercial publications. The information obtained could be vital in a national or international emergency, and is essential to the logistical support planning operations conducted by MARAD officials. The information is used in contingency planning and provides data related to potential sealift capacity to support movement of fuel and military equipment to crisis zones. *Annual Estimated Burden Hours:* 40 hours. ADDRESSES: Send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street Northwest, Washington, DC 20503, Attention MARAD Desk Officer. Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. A comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Authority: 49 CFR 1.66. Issued in Washington, DC, on December 16, 2005. Joel C. Richard, Secretary, Maritime Administration. [FR Doc. E5-7727 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-81-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [U.S. DOT Docket Number NHTSA-2005-23383] Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation. ACTION: Request for public comment on proposed collection of information. SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit public comment on proposed collections of information, including extensions and reinstatement of previously approved collections. This document describes one collection of information for which NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval. DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 21, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments must refer to the docket notice numbers cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted to Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Please identify the proposed collection of information for which a comment is provided, by referencing its OMB Clearance Number. It is requested, but not required, that 2 copies of the comment be provided. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Complete copies of each request for collection of information may be obtained at no charge from Sean H. McLaurin, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room 6124A, NPO-122, Washington, DC 20590. Mr. McLaurin's telephone number is
(202)366-4800. Please identify the relevant collection of information by referring to its OMB Control Number. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB for approval, it must first publish a document in the **Federal Register** providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise consult with members of the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of information. The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what must be included in such a document. Under OMB's regulation (at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must ask for public comment on the following:
(i)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(ii)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(iii)how to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(iv)how to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks for public comments on the following proposed collections of information: *Title:* Extension of Clearance. *OMB Control Number:* 2127-0001. *Affected Public:* State, Local, or Tribal Government. *Form Number:* This collection of information uses no standard form. *Abstract:* The purpose of the NDR is to assist States and other authorized users in obtaining information about problem drivers. State motor vehicle agencies submit and use the information for driver licensing purposes. Other users obtain the information for transportation safety purposes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 2633. *Number of Respondents:* 51 State driver licensing agencies, including the District of Columbia. Comments are invited on: whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Issued on: December 14, 2005. Joseph S. Carra, Associate Administrator for the National Center for Statistics and Analysis. [FR Doc. E5-7716 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket Number NHTSA-2005-23389] Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation. ACTION: Request for public comment on proposed collection of information. SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit public comment on proposed collections of information, including extensions and reinstatement of previously approved collections. This document describes one collection of information for which NHTSA intends to seek extension of an existing OMB approval. Comments must be received on or before February 21, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments must refer to the docket notice numbers cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted to Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Please identify the proposed collection of information for which a comment is provided, by referencing its OMB clearance Number. It is requested, but not required, that 2 copies of the comment be provided. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Complete copies of each request for collection of information may be obtained at no charge from Samuel Daniel, Jr., NHTSA 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room 5313 G, NVS-122,Washington, DC 20590. Mr. Daniel's telephone number is
(202)366-4921. Please identify the relevant collection of information by referring to its OMB Control Number. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB for approval, it must first publish a document in the **Federal Register** providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise consult with members of the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of information. The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what must be included in such a document. Under OMB's regulation (at 5CFR 1320.8(d), an agency must ask for public comment on the following:
(i)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(ii)The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(iii)How to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(iv)How to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, *e.g.* permitting electronic submission of responses. In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks for public comments on the following proposed collections of information: *Title:* Phase-in Production Reporting Requirements for Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems. *OMB Control Number:* 2127-0631. *Type of Approval:* Extension of existing collection of information. *Affected Public:* Approximately 21 motor vehicle manufacturers. *Form Number:* No standard forms will be used in this collection. *Abstract:* The Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act mandates in Section 13, that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) complete “a rulemaking for a regulation to require a warning system in new motor vehicles to indicate to the operator when a tire is significantly under inflated.” NHTSA issued a final rule on April 8, 2005, establishing Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 138, Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems, in response to Section 13 of the TREAD ACT. FMVSS No. 138 specifies that compliance be phased in over a 2-year period beginning on October 5, 2005 as follows: between October 5, 2005 and August 31, 2006, 20 percent of new vehicles produced must comply with FMVSS No. 138; 70 percent of vehicles produced between September 1, 2006 and August 31, 2007 must comply with the Standard; and all vehicles produced after August 31, 2007 must comply with FMVSS No. 138. The agency decided to include both carry-forward and carry-back credit features in FMVSS No. 138, which provide vehicle manufacturers the opportunity to count compliant vehicles manufactured in a given year toward the phase-in percentage requirements for one of the subsequent phase-in years (carry-forward), or to count compliant vehicles manufactured in a given year toward the phase-in percentage requirements for the previous phase-in year. This information collection request would provide the agency with vehicle manufacturers' production data to verify that the manufacturers have met the production requirements of the phase-in as detailed in Section S7 of the Standard. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 42 hours. *Number of Respondents:* 21 motor vehicle manufacturers. *Comments are invited on:* Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Issued on: December 19, 2005. Stephen R. Kratzke, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. [FR Doc. E5-7717 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [STB Docket No. AB-297 (Sub-No. 102X)] Columbus and Greenville Railway Company—Abandonment Exemption—in Leflore County, MS Columbus and Greenville Railway Company (C&G) has filed a notice of exemption under 49 CFR Part 1152 Subpart F— *Exempt Abandonments* to abandon a 1.18-mile line of railroad between milepost 112.67 and milepost 113.85, in the City of Greenwood (City), in Leflore County, MS. The line traverses United States Postal Service Zip Code 38930. 1 1 C&G indicated in an earlier filing that it would seek abandonment of the above-described rail line. *See Columbus and Greenville Railway Company—Acquisition and Operation Exemption—Line of City of Greenwood, MS* , STB Finance Docket No. 34666 (STB served Apr. 22, 2005). C&G has certified that:
(1)No local traffic has moved over the line for at least 2 years;
(2)any overhead traffic on the line can be and has been rerouted over other lines;
(3)no formal complaint filed by a user of rail service on the line (or by a state or local government entity acting on behalf of such user) regarding cessation of service over the line either is pending with the Surface Transportation Board or with any U.S. District Court or has been decided in favor of complainant within the 2-year period; and
(4)the requirements at 49 CFR 1105.7 (environmental reports), 49 CFR 1105.8 (historic reports), 49 CFR 1105.11 (transmittal letter), 49 CFR 1105.12 (newspaper publication), and 49 CFR 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to governmental agencies) have been met. As a condition to this exemption, any employee adversely affected by the abandonment shall be protected under *Oregon Short Line R. Co.—Abandonment—Goshen* , 360 I.C.C. 91 (1979). To address whether this condition adequately protects affected employees, a petition for partial revocation under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) must be filed. Provided no formal expression of intent to file an offer of financial assistance
(OFA)has been received, this exemption will be effective on January 21, 2006, 2 unless stayed pending reconsideration. Petitions to stay that do not involve environmental issues, 3 formal expressions of intent to file an OFA under 49 CFR 1152.27(c)(2), 4 and trail use/rail banking requests under 49 CFR 1152.29 must be filed by December 30, 2005. Petitions to reopen or requests for public use conditions under 49 CFR 1152.28 must be filed by January 11, 2006, 5 with the Surface Transportation Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. 2 Pursuant to 49 CFR 1152.50(d)(2), the railroad must file a verified notice with the Board at least 50 days before the abandonment or discontinuance is to be consummated. In its verified notice, applicant did not indicate a consummation date as required. Based on a subsequent conversation with the applicant's representative, it was confirmed that consummation would not occur before January 21, 2006, 50 days after the December 2, 2005 filing of the verified notice. 3 The Board will grant a stay if an informed decision on environmental issues (whether raised by a party or by the Board's Section of Environmental Analysis
(SEA)in its independent investigation) cannot be made before the exemption's effective date. *See Exemption of Out-of-Service Rail Lines* , 5 I.C.C.2d 377 (1989). Any request for a stay should be filed as soon as possible so that the Board may take appropriate action before the exemption's effective date. 4 Each OFA must be accompanied by the filing fee, which currently is set at $1,200. *See* 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25). 5 The City filed a request for issuance of a public use condition under 49 U.S.C. 10905. The Board will address the City's public use request, along with any others that may be filed, in a subsequent decision. A copy of any petition filed with the Board should be sent to C&G's representative: H. Lynn Gibson, 201 19th Street North, Columbus, MS 39703. If the verified notice contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void *ab initio.* C&G has filed environmental and historic reports which address the effects, if any, of the abandonment on the environment and historic resources. SEA will issue an environmental assessment
(EA)by December 27, 2005. Interested persons may obtain a copy of the EA by writing to SEA (Room 500, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, DC 20423-0001) or by calling SEA, at
(202)565-1539. [Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8339.] Comments on environmental and historic preservation matters must be filed within 15 days after the EA becomes available to the public. Environmental, historic preservation, public use, or trail use/rail banking conditions will be imposed, where appropriate, in a subsequent decision. Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR 1152.29(e)(2), C&G shall file a notice of consummation with the Board to signify that it has exercised the authority granted and fully abandoned the line. If consummation has not been effected by C&G's filing of a notice of consummation by December 22, 2006, and there are no legal or regulatory barriers to consummation, the authority to abandon will automatically expire. Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at *http://www.stb.dot.gov.* Decided: December 16, 2005. By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of Proceedings. Vernon A. Williams, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-7711 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4915-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 8902 AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning Form 8902, Alternative Tax on Qualifying Shipping Activities. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 21, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn Kirkland, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the form and instructions should be directed to Allan Hopkins, at
(202)622-6665, or at Internal Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or through the Internet, at *Allan.M.Hopkins@irs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Alternative Tax on Qualified Shipping Activities. *OMB Number:* 1545-1968. *Form Number:* Form 8902. *Abstract:* Form 8902 is used to elect the alternative tax on national income from qualifying shipping activities and to figure the alternative tax. *Current Actions:* There are no changes being made to the form at this time. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Businesses or other for-profit institutions. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 200. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 15 hr., 17 min. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 3,056. The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. *Request for comments:* Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: December 14, 2005. Glenn P. Kirkland, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7649 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service [REG-209823-96] Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Regulation Project AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning an existing final regulation, REG-209823-96 (TD 8791), Guidance regarding Charitable Remainder Trusts and Special Valuation Rules for Transfers of Interests and Trusts. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 21, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn P. Kirkland, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of this regulation should be directed to R. Joseph Durbala,
(202)622-3634, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or through the Internet at *RJoseph.Durbala@irs.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Guidance Regarding Charitable Remainder Trusts and Special Valuation Rules for Transfers of Interests and Trusts. *OMB Number:* 1545-1536. *Regulation Project Number:* REG-209823-96. *Abstract:* This regulation provides guidance relating to charitable remainder trusts and to special valuation rules for transfers of interests in trusts. Section 1.664-1(a)(7) of the regulation provides that either an independent trustee or qualified appraiser using a qualified appraisal must value a charitable remainder trust's assets that do not have an objective, ascertainable value. *Current Actions:* There is no change to this existing regulation. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Businesses or other for-profit organizations. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 150. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 30 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 75. The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. *Request for Comments:* Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: December 12, 2005. Allan Hopkins, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7652 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 706-CE AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13(44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning Form 706-CE, Certificate of Payment of Foreign Death Tax. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 21, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn P. Kirkland, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the form and instructions should be directed to R. Joseph Durbala, at
(202)622-3634, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or through the Internet at *RJoseph.Durbala@irs.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Certificate of Payment of Foreign Death Tax. *OMB Number:* 1545-0260. *Form Number:* 706-CE. *Abstract:* Form 706-CE is used by the executors of estates to certify that foreign death taxes have been paid so that the estate may claim the foreign death tax credit allowed by Internal Revenue Code section 2014. The information is used by IRS to verify that the proper credit has been claimed. *Current Actions:* There are no changes being made to Form 706-CE at this time. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Individual or households. *Estimated Number of Responses:* 2,250. *Estimated Time Per Response:* 1 hr., 44 min. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 3,870. The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. *Request for comments:* Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: December 15, 2005. Glenn P. Kirkland, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7653 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Proposed Collection; Comment Request for REG-106486-98 (Final) AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning REG-106486-98 (Final), Guidance Regarding the Treatment of Certain Contingent Payment Debt Instructions with one or more Payments that are Denominated in, or Determined by Reference to, a Nonfunctional Currency. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 21, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn P. Kirkland, Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the form and instructions should be directed to R. Joseph Durbala,
(202)622-3634, at Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or through the Internet at *RJoseph.Durbala@irs.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Guidance Regarding the Treatment of Certain Contingent Payment Debt Instructions with one or more Payments that are Denominated in, or Determined by Reference to, a Nonfunctional Currency. *OMB Number:* 1545-1831. *Form Number:* REG-106486-98. *Abstract:* The IRS needs the information from the holder of certain debt instruments in order to alert the agency that the computation of interest income/expense by the holder and issuer will not be consistent. The respondents will be holders of contingent payment debt instruments which require payments to be made in or by reference to foreign currency. The respondents will probably be investment banks, however, may also include others who hold these debt instruments for investment. *Current Actions:* There is no change in the paperwork burden previously approved by OMB. This form is being submitted for renewal purposes only. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Businesses and other for-profit organizations, Farms. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 100. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 1 hour. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 100. The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. *Request for comments:* Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: December 13, 2005. Glenn P. Kirkland, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7655 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 8883 AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning Form 8883, Asset Allocation Statement Under Section 338. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 21, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn P. Kirkland, Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the form and instructions should be directed to R. Joseph Durbala,
(202)622-3634, Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224, or through the Internet at *RJoseph.Durbala@irs.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Asset Allocation Statement Under Section 338. *OMB Number:* 1545-1806. *Form Number:* 8883. *Abstract:* Form 8883 is used to report information regarding transactions involving the deemed sale of corporate assets under section 338. *Current Actions:* There are no changes being made to the form at this time. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit organizations. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 201. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 24 hours, 31 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 4,929. The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. *Request for Comments:* Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: December 13, 2005. Glenn P. Kirkland, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7657 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service [IA-7-88] Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Regulation Project AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13(44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning an existing final regulation, IA-7-88 (TD 8379), Excise Tax Relating to Gain or Other Income Realized by Any Person on Receipt of Greenmail (§§ 155.6011-1, 155.6001-1, 155.6081-1, and 155.6161-1). DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 21, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn Kirkland, Internal Revenue Service, room 6512, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the regulations should be directed to Larnice Mack at Internal Revenue Service, room 6512, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224, or at (202)622-3179, or through the internet at ( *Larnice.Mack@irs.gov* ). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Excise Tax Relating to Gain or Other Income Realized By Any Person on Receipt of Greenmail. *OMB Number:* 1545-1049. *Regulation Project Number:* IA-7-88. *Abstract:* The regulations provide rules relating to the manner and method of reporting and paying the nondeductible 50 percent excise tax imposed by section 5881 of the Internal Revenue Code with respect to the receipt of greenmail. The reporting requirements will be used to verify that the excise tax imposed under section 5881 is properly reported and timely paid. *Current Actions:* There is no change to this existing regulation. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Individuals and business or other for-profit organizations. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 4. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 30 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 2. The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. *Request for Comments:* Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: December 15, 2005. Glenn P. Kirkland, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7658 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service [REG-124069-02, REG-118966-97] Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Regulation Project AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning an existing final regulation, REG-124069-02, Section 6038—Returns Required with Respect to Controlled Foreign Partnerships; and existing final regulation, REG-118966-97, Information reporting with Respect to Certain Foreign Partnerships and Certain Foreign Corporations. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 21, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn P. Kirkland, Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the regulations should be directed to Allan Hopkins, at
(202)622-6665, or at Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or through the Internet, at *Allan.M.Hopkins@irs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Section 6038—Returns Required with Respect to Controlled Foreign Partnerships, and Information reporting with Respect to Certain Foreign Partnerships and Certain Foreign Corporations. *OMB Number:* 1545-1617. *Regulation Project Number:* REG-124069-02, REG-118966-97. *Abstract: REG-124069-02:* Treasury Regulation § 1.6038-3 requires certain United States persons who own interests in controlled foreign partnerships to annually report information to the IRS on Form 8865. This regulation amends the reporting rules under Treasury Regulation section § 1.6038-e to provide that a U.S. person must follow the filing requirements that are specified in the instructions for Form 8865 when the U.S. person must file Form 8865 and the foreign partnership completes and files Form 1065 or Form 1065-B. REG-118966-97: Section 6038 requires certain U.S. persons who own interest in controlled foreign partnerships or certain foreign corporations to annually report information to the IRS. This regulation provides reporting rules to identify foreign partnerships and foreign corporations which are controlled by U.S. persons. *Current Actions:* There are no changes to these existing regulations. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Businesses or other for-profit institutions and individuals or households. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 500. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 250. The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. *Request for Comments:* Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: December 15, 2005. Glenn P. Kirkland, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7659 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Revenue Procedure 99-39 AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning Revenue Procedure 99-39, Form 941 e-file program. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 21, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn Kirkland, Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the regulations should be directed to Larnice Mack at Internal Revenue Service, room 6512, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or at
(202)622-3179, or through the Internet at ( *Larnice.Mack@irs.gov* ). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Form 941 e-file Program. *OMB Number:* 1545-1557. *Revenue Procedure Number:* Revenue Procedure 99-39. *Abstract:* Revenue Procedure 99-39 provides the requirements of the 941 e-file Program, which combines the Form 941 Electronic Filing
(ELF)Program with an on-line filing program that allows a taxpayer to electronically file a Form 941, Employer's Quarterly Federal Tax Return, using a personal computer, modem, and commercial tax preparation software. *Current Actions:* There are no changes being made to the revenue procedure at this time. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit organizations, not-for-profit institutions, and Federal, state, local or tribal governments. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 390,200. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 37 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 238,863. The following paragraph applies to all the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. Request for Comments Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: December 15, 2005. Glenn P. Kirkland, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7660 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 1120X AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13(44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning Form 1120X, Amended U.S. Corporation Income Tax Return. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 21, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn P. Kirkland, Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the form and instructions should be directed to R. Joseph Durbala at
(202)622-3634, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or through the Internet at *RJoseph.Durbala@irs.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Amended U.S. Corporation Income Tax Return. *OMB Number:* 1545-0132. *Form Number:* 1120X. *Abstract:* Domestic corporations use Form 1120X to correct a previously filed Form 1120 or Form 1120-A. The data is used to determine if the correct tax liability has been reported. *Current Actions:* There is a change in the total taxpayer burden due to the net decrease of 2 lines and an increase of 1 Code reference. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit organizations and farms. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 16,699. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 18 hrs. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 300,582. The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. *Request for comments:* Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: December 15, 2005. Glenn P. Kirkland, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7661 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Proposed Collection; Comment Request Revenue Procedure 96-52 AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13(44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning Revenue Procedure 96-52, Acceptance Agents (IRB 1996-48). DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 21, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn Kirkland, Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the form(s) and instructions should be directed to R. Joseph Durbala,
(202)622-3634, Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224, or through the Internet at *RJoseph.Durbala@irs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Acceptance Agents. *OMB Number:* 1545-1499. *Revenue Procedure Number:* Revenue Procedures 96-52. *Abstract:* Revenue Procedure 96-52 describes application procedures for becoming an acceptance agent and the requisite agreement that an agent must execute with the Internal Revenue Service. *Current Actions:* There are no changes being made to the revenue procedure at this time. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Individuals, business or other for-profit organizations, not-for-profit institutions, Federal Government, and state, local or tribal governments. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 8,000. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 3 hrs., 12 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 24,960. The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. *Request for Comments:* Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: December 13, 2005. Glenn P. Kirkland, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7668 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Forms 5310 and 6088 AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning Form 5310, Application for Determination for Terminating Plan, and Form 6088, Distributable Benefits from Employee Pension Benefit Plans. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 21, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn P. Kirkland, Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the forms and instructions should be directed to Allan Hopkins, at
(202)622-6665, or at Internal Revenue Service, room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or through the Internet, at *Allan.M.Hopkins@irs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Form 5310, Application for Determination for Terminating Plan, and Form 6088, Distributable Benefits from Employee Pension Benefit Plans. *OMB Number:* 1545-0202. *Form Number:* Forms 5310 and 6088. *Abstract:* Employers who have qualified deferred compensation plans can take an income tax deduction for contributions to their plans. Form 5310 is used to request an IRS determination letter about the plan's qualification status (qualified or non-qualified) under Internal Revenue Code section 401(a). Form 6088 is used to show the amounts of distributable benefits to participants in the plan. *Current Actions:* There are no changes being made to the forms at this time. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit organizations. *Estimated Number of Responses:* 30,000. *Estimated Time Per Response:* 60 hours, 46 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 1,813,650. The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. Request for Comments Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: December 14, 2005. Glenn P. Kirkland, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7673 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service [CO-68-87; CO-69-87; CO-18-90] Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Regulation Project AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning existing final regulations, CO-68-87 and CO-69-87 (TD 8352), Final Regulations Under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; Pre-change Attributes, and CO-18-90 (TD 8531), Final Regulations Under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; Limitations on Corporate Net Operating Loss Carryforwards (§§ 1.382-4 and 1.382-2T). DATES: Written comments should be received on or before February 21, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Glenn Kirkland, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the regulation should be directed to Allan Hopkins, at
(202)622-6665, or at Internal Revenue Service, Room 6516, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or through the Internet, at *Allan.M.Hopkins@irs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* CO-68-87 and CO-69-87 (TD 8352), Final Regulations Under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; Pre-change Attributes, and CO-18-90 (TD 8531), Final Regulations Under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; Limitations on Corporate Net Operating Loss Carryforwards. *OMB Number:* 1545-1120. *Regulation Project Number:* CO-68-87; CO-69-87; CO-18-90. *Abstract:* (CO-68-87 and CO-69-87) These regulations require reporting by a corporation after it undergoes an “ownership change” under Code sections 382 and 383. Corporations required to report under these regulations include those with capital loss carryovers and excess credits. (CO-18-90) These regulations provide rules for the treatment of options under Code section 382 for purposes of determining whether a corporation undergoes an ownership change. The regulation allows for certain elections for corporations whose stock is subject to options. *Current Actions:* There is no change to these existing regulations. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit organizations. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 75,150. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 2 hours, 56 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 220,575. The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. Request for Comments Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Approved: December 14, 2005. Glenn P. Kirkland, IRS Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7675 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P 70 245 Thursday, December 22, 2005 Presidential Documents Title 3— The President Presidential Determination No. 2006-5 of December 14, 2005 Suspension of Limitations Under the Jerusalem Embassy Act Memorandum for the Secretary of State Pursuant to the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including section 7(a) of the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-45) (the “Act”), I hereby determine that it is necessary to protect the national security interests of the United States to suspend for a period of 6 months the limitations set forth in sections 3(b) and 7(b) of the Act. My Administration remains committed to beginning the process of moving our Embassy to Jerusalem. You are hereby authorized and directed to transmit this determination to the Congress, accompanied by a report in accordance with section 7(a) of the Act, and to publish the determination in the **Federal Register** . This suspension shall take effect after transmission of this determination and report to the Congress. B THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, December 14, 2005. [FR Doc. 05-24430 Filed 12-21-05; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 24
Traces to 24 documents
28 references not yet in our index
  • 10 CFR 51
  • 10 CFR 140
  • 17 CFR 240.19
  • 400 F.3d 1119
  • Pub. L. 87-256
  • 22 CFR 62
  • Pub. L. 104-319
  • Pub. L. 106-113
  • 49 CFR 1.66
  • 5 CFR 1320.8(d)
  • 49 CFR 1152
  • 49 CFR 1105.7
  • 49 CFR 1105.8
  • 49 CFR 1105.11
  • 49 CFR 1105.12
  • 49 CFR 1152.50(d)(1)
  • 49 CFR 1152.27(c)(2)
  • 49 CFR 1152.29
  • 49 CFR 1152.28
  • 49 CFR 1152.50(d)(2)
  • 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25)
  • 49 CFR 1152.29(e)(2)
  • Pub. L. 104-13
  • T.D. 8791
  • T.D. 8379
  • T.D. 8352
  • T.D. 8531
  • Pub. L. 104-45
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of opportunity for public comment
C.F.R.§ 2.309
C.F.R.§ 50.80
U.S.C.§ 2201
C.F.R.§ 50.75
C.F.R.§ 2.1315
C.F.R.§ 51.21
C.F.R.§ 50.55
U.S.C.§ 3501
U.S.C.§ 78s
F. App'x400 F.3d 1119
Cite10 CFR 51
Cite10 CFR 140
Cites 52 · showing 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.