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 · 2006-01-13 · RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD · Notices

Notices. Notice

14,688 words·~67 min read·/register/2006/01/13/06-368·

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

BILLING CODE 7708-01-P RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD Agency Forms Submitted for OMB Review *Summary:* In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the Railroad Retirement Board
(RRB)has submitted the following proposal(s) for the collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget for review and approval. Summary of Proposal(s)
(1)*Collection title:* Employers Quarterly Report of Contributions Under the RUIA.
(2)*Form(s) submitted:* DC-1.
(3)*OMB Number:* 3220-0012.
(4)*Expiration date of current OMB clearance:* March 31, 2006.
(5)*Type of request:* Extension of a currently approved collection.
(6)*Respondents:* Business or other for-profit.
(7)*Estimated annual number of respondents:* 540.
(8)*Total annual responses:* 2,160.
(9)*Total annual reporting hours:* 900.
(10)*Collection description:* Railroad employers are required to make contributions to the Railroad Unemployment Insurance fund quarterly or annually equal to a percentage of the creditable compensation paid to each employee. The information furnished on the report accompanying the remittance is used to determine correctness of the amount paid. *Additional Information or Comments:* Copies of the forms and supporting documents can be obtained from Charles Mierzwa, the agency clearance officer (312-751-3363) or *Charles.Mierzwa@rrb.gov.* Comments regarding the information collection should be addressed to Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2092 or *Ronald.Hodapp@rrb.gov* and to the OMB Desk Officer for the RRB, at the Office of Management and Budget, Room 10230, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. Charles Mierzwa, Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E6-318 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7905-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [File No. 1-11535] Issuer Delisting; Notice of Application of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation, To Withdraw Its Common Stock, $.01 Par Value, From Listing and Registration on the Pacific Exchange, Inc. January 6, 2006. On December 20, 2005, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Issuer”), filed an application with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 12(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 12d2-2(d) thereunder, 2 to withdraw its common stock, $.01 par value (“Security”), from listing and registration on the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (“PCX”). 1 15 U.S.C. 78 *l* (d). 2 17 CFR 240.12d2-2(d). The Board of Directors (“Board”) of the Issuer approved resolutions on December 8, 2005 to withdraw the Security from PCX. The Issuer stated that the Board decided to withdraw the Security from PCX because the benefits of continued listing on PCX do not outweigh the incremental cost of the listing fees and the administrative burden associated with listing on PCX. The Issuer stated that the Security is listed on the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (“NYSE”) and will continue to list on NYSE. The Issuer stated in its application that it has complied with applicable rules of PCX by complying with all applicable laws in the State of Delaware, the state in which the Issuer is incorporated, and by providing PCX with the required documents governing the withdrawal of securities from listing and registration on PCX. The Issuer's application relates solely to the withdrawal of the Security from listing on PCX and shall not affect its continued listing on NYSE or its obligation to be registered under Section 12(b) of the Act. 3 3 15 U.S.C. 78 *l* (b). Any interested person may, on or before February 1, 2006, comment on the facts bearing upon whether the application has been made in accordance with the rules of PCX, and what terms, if any, should be imposed by the Commission for the protection of investors. All comment letters may be submitted by either of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include the File Number 1-11535 or; Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number 1-11535. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help us 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/delist.shtml* ). Comments are also available for public inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. All comments received will be posted without change; we do not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. The Commission, based on the information submitted to it, will issue an order granting the application after the date mentioned above, unless the Commission determines to order a hearing on the matter. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 4 4 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(1). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-253 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [File No. 1-31528] Issuer Delisting; Notice of Application of IAMGOLD Corporation To Withdraw Its Common Shares, No Par Value, From Listing and Registration on the American Stock Exchange LLC January 6, 2006. On December 13, 2005, IAMGOLD Corporation, a Canadian corporation (“Issuer”), filed an application with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 12(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 12d2-2(d) thereunder, 2 to withdraw its common shares, no par value (“Security”), from listing and registration on the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex”). 1 15 U.S.C. 78 *l* (d). 2 17 CFR 240.12d2-2(d). On October 31, 2005, the Board of Directors (“Board”) of the Issuer unanimously approved resolutions to withdraw the Security from listing on Amex and to list the Security on the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (“NYSE”). The Issuer stated that the Board determined to withdraw the Security from Amex and list the Security on NYSE for the following reasons:
(i)The Board believes it is in the best interest of the Issuer to list the Security on NYSE to enhance the profile of the Issuer; and
(ii)in order to avoid the direct and indirect costs and the division of the market resulting from dual listing on Amex and NYSE. The Issuer stated in its application that it has met the requirements of Amex Rule 18 by complying with all applicable laws in effect in Canada, in which it is incorporated, and providing written notice of withdrawal to Amex. The Issuer's application relates solely to the withdrawal of the Security from listing on Amex, and shall not affect its continued listing on NYSE or its obligation to be registered under Section 12(b) of the Act. 3 3 15 U.S.C. 78 *l* (b). Any interested person may, on or before February 1, 2006, comment on the facts bearing upon whether the application has been made in accordance with the rules of Amex, and what terms, if any, should be imposed by the Commission for the protection of investors. All comment letters may be submitted by either of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/delist.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include the File Number 1-31528 or; Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number 1-31528. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help us 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/delist.shtml* ). Comments are also available for public inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. All comments received will be posted without change; we do not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. The Commission, based on the information submitted to it, will issue an order granting the application after the date mentioned above, unless the Commission determines to order a hearing on the matter. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 4 4 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(1). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-254 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53055; File No. SR-ISE-2005-58] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 700 With Respect to the Hours of Trading in Equity Options and Narrow-Based Index Options January 5, 2006 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 27, 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, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the ISE. 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 ISE proposes to amend its rules governing the hours of trading in equity options and narrow-based index options. The Exchange proposes that these changes be implemented on February 1, 2006. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the ISE's Web site ( *http://www.iseoptions.com* ), at the ISE's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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 this rule change is to amend ISE Rule 700 governing the hours of trading in equity options and narrow-based index options. Specifically, the ISE proposes to amend its rule to change the close of the normal trading hours in options on individual stocks and narrow-based indexes from 4:02 p.m. to 4 p.m. (New York time). After the change, the time of the close of trading in these ISE options will correspond to the normal time set for the close of trading on the primary exchanges listing the stocks underlying the ISE options. The primary exchanges generally close at 4 p.m. (New York time). The Exchange notes that in 1997 the closing time for options on individual stocks and narrow-based index was changed from 4:10 p.m. to 4:02 p.m. (New York time). The rationale to continue trading options for some limited period of time after the close of trading on the primary markets for the underlying securities was that the extended period allowed options traders to respond to late reports of closing prices over the consolidated tape. If the price of a late reported trade on an underlying security was substantially different from the previous reported price, the extended trading session would give options traders the opportunity to bring options quotes in line with the closing price of the underlying security. However, because of improvements in the processing and reporting of transactions, the ISE believes that there often are no longer significant delays in the reporting of closing prices, and, therefore, a two minute session is no longer needed to trade options after the underlying securities close trading. Additionally, the Exchange believes that pricing aberrations can occur if an option is traded when the underlying stock is no longer trading, since there is a close relationship in the price of the underlying stock and the overlying option. As a result, the ISE believes that it is difficult for the market to price options accurately when the underlying security is not trading. As noted above, the Exchange also proposes to change the closing time for options on narrow-based indexes, as defined in ISE Rule 2001, because these indexes are subject to the same pricing problems as options on individual stocks. According to the ISE, a significant news announcement on one component of a narrow-based index could have a significant effect on that index. However, the Exchange is not at this time proposing to change the closing time of 4:15 p.m. for options on a broad-based index, as defined in ISE Rule 2001, because the ISE believes that it is unlikely that a significant news announcement by the issuer on one component stock of a broad-based index is likely to have a significant effect on the price of that broad-based index. Accordingly, the Exchange is also proposing to codify a 4:15 p.m. closing time for options on a broad-based index. The Exchange notes that if it were to unilaterally modify its closing time, the existence of dissimilar closing times applicable to the different options exchanges would likely lead to confusion for options investors and broker-dealers. It is the ISE's understanding that all of the options exchanges have determined to change their respective rules to adjust the closing time in options on individual stocks and narrow-based indexes from 4:02 p.m. to 4 p.m. (New York time). The ISE further understands that the options exchanges collectively have determined that they would implement this new closing time on February 1, 2006. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 3 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 4 in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 3 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The ISE 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 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 Exchange consents, the Commission will:
(A)By order approve such proposed rule change, or
(B)Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form at ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-ISE-2005-58 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2005-58. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the 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 Number SR-ISE-2005-58 and should be submitted on or before January 30, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 5 5 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-255 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53071; File No. SR-NYSE-2005-91] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Revise Certain of the Exchange's Facility and Equipment Fees and System Processing Fees Charged to Members January 6, 2006. 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 29, 2005, the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Exchange” or “NYSE”) 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 NYSE. The NYSE has designated this proposal as establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by a self-regulatory organization pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240. 19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The NYSE proposes to revise certain of its Facility and Equipment Fees and System Processing Fees charged to members. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the NYSE Web site, ( *http://www.nyse.com* ), at the NYSE'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 NYSE 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 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 The Exchange has undertaken a thorough analysis of its various fees charged to Exchange members for floor and equipment and system processing services. This analysis has taken into account the changing business models of the Exchange's members. In most cases, the Exchange's fees have not been meaningfully revised for a period of five to 15 years. In response to this analysis, the Exchange proposes to revise its fee schedules for certain floor and equipment and system processing services. These revisions to the Exchange's fee schedules would take effect January 1, 2006 and form part of the Exchange's 2006 Price List. The proposed changes are defined by certain core objectives: • Establish a fee structure that more accurately and equitably reflects member firms' utilization of floor and equipment and system processing services; • Simplify the Exchange's fee schedules and make them easier to understand; • Recognize the overall costs members incur in order to trade at the Exchange; and • Encourage participation in the NYSE's marketplace. The Exchange proposes to revise the pricing of trading floor services in four primary areas: Specialist Fees, Booth Fees, Clerk Badge Fees, and Usage-Based Fees. *Specialist Fees.* The Exchange will charge specialist firms a new “Trading Privilege Fee” that will replace several existing Exchange fees including the Specialist Floor Fee, the Specialist Post Fee, Specialist Odd Lot Charges, and Specialist System Charges. This Trading Privilege Fee will be assessed monthly on the Exchange's specialist firms for each security, including any investment company unit (“ICU”) traded, 5 and will be determined based on each security's consolidated average daily dollar volume. 5 Includes securities and ICUs admitted to dealings on an unlisted trading privileges
(UTP)basis. The Exchange anticipates that this Trading Privilege Fee will: • Further increase transparency and simplify Exchange fees for specialists by replacing four separate fees with one new fee; • Position the Exchange's floor revenues to grow with potential future growth in the NYSE's new listings business; • More closely align the Exchange's floor-related fees from specialists with the fundamental driver of their business activity; and • Help offset the costs incurred to provide technology and other infrastructure to support specialist firms operating on the floor of the Exchange. *Booth Fees.* Currently, the Exchange charges an annual fee per booth, 6 billed monthly on a pro-rated basis, 7 that is determined based on the particular size and location of each booth within the Exchange's five trading rooms. Under its revised booth pricing schedule, the Exchange will charge a flat fee per booth based solely on the trading room where each booth is located. This change will allow the Exchange to simplify its price schedule by reducing the number of booth fees from several hundred to four and will enable member firms to more easily assess their booth-related floor costs. In order to further simplify the current booth pricing schedule, and to ensure that members are only charged for services actually utilized on the trading floor, the Exchange is also eliminating the minimum Floor Privilege Fee. 6 Booths are workspaces located around the perimeter of the trading floor where member firms and independent brokers receive orders. 7 In its filing, the Exchange described this fee as a monthly fee. The Exchange confirmed in a telephone conference between John Carey, Assistant General Counsel, NYSE, and David L. Orlic, Attorney, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, on January 6, 2006 that the fee is in fact an annual fee billed monthly on a pro-rated basis. *Clerk Badge Fees.* Currently, the Exchange maintains two different rates for Telephone Clerk Tickets, depending upon the ratio of telephone clerks per booth or post space. The Exchange will now charge one flat fee per eligible person. This flat fee is intended to simplify for member firms the process of calculating the incremental cost of an individual employee on the floor and to provide greater transparency to member firms with respect to the subsidized services their employees utilize at the Exchange, such as security and subsidized cafeteria and medical services. In addition, the name of this fee is being changed from Telephone Clerk Ticket to Clerk Badge Fee to further enhance the transparency of the Exchange's price structure. *Usage-Based Fees.* The Exchange is changing its fees for several usage-based services provided by the Exchange, including eBroker handheld devices, telephone lines, the Online Comparison System, and Exceptional System Messages. • *eBroker Handheld Devices.* The Exchange currently provides its proprietary eBroker handheld device to brokers on the floor of the Exchange free of charge. The Exchange is introducing an annual charge of $5,000 per eBroker device in order to: • Allow the Exchange to recoup a portion of the costs incurred to develop and maintain the proprietary eBroker system; • Encourage competition and technological development by outside vendors in the provision of products such as handheld devices for use on the trading floor; and • Recognize that eBroker is not used by all brokers, thus creating an incentive for those brokers who do use it to do so efficiently. • *Telephone Lines.* The Exchange currently charges brokers for telephone lines that originate on the floor of the Exchange and terminate at a customer site, and the Exchange does not currently charge for telephone lines that terminate at a broker's own back-office or trading room. The Exchange will now charge brokers a fee for each telephone line, regardless of where the line terminates. The Exchange believes this change in the telephone line charge will: • Establish a more equitable usage-based pricing structure by imposing a standard rate per telephone line, regardless of where the line terminates; and • Create an incentive for member firms to more efficiently use the Exchange's telephone capacity and systems. • *Online Comparison System.* The Exchange has not revised any fees related to its Online Comparison System (“OCS”) since the system was first introduced in 1989. The Exchange is revising the prices for OCS access and per-submission fees in order to: • Recover incremental fees to help offset OCS development and maintenance costs, which have continued to increase as a result of ongoing system improvements; and • Establish a more simplified and equitable usage-based fee schedule by:
(i)Establishing a flat remote access fee regardless of how a member firm chooses to access the OCS system; and
(ii)establishing a flat per-submission fee rather than differentiating pricing based on the size of each particular transaction, which has no bearing on the actual cost to process a submission. • *Exceptional System Message Fee.* A new fee of $0.01 per “Exceptional System Message” will be applied. An Exceptional System Message is defined as any system 8 message, as measured by mnemonic 9 on a daily basis, that exceeds the following criteria:
(i)The ratio of a mnemonic's share of the total system messages to the mnemonic's share of total executed system volume exceeds 10:1; and
(ii)the mnemonic's cancelled system orders as a percentage of its total system orders exceeds 90.0%. If a mnemonic exceeds these two thresholds for a particular trading day, the Exceptional System Message fee will be applied only towards those cancelled system messages in excess of 90.0% of that mnemonic's total system orders for the day. Any fees incurred as a result of this Exceptional System Message fee will not be applied towards either the monthly dollar cap on transaction fees (which is currently set at $600,000) or the commission-based 2% cap on transaction fees. It is intended that this fee will help to compensate the Exchange for the cost of the incremental system capacity that must be readily available to accommodate trading strategies that result in significant volumes of system messages and cancellations. 8 The relevant system is SuperDOT®, the Exchange's Designated Order Turnaround System. 9 Mnemonics, which are alphabetical identifiers issued by the NYSE to its member firms and their customers, are required for order entry and identification purposes. 1. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 10 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 11 in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members. 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange 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 has neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 12 and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 13 because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange. At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 14 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 14 *See* 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). 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-NYSE-2005-91 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2005-91. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site *(http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml)* . Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the 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-2005-91 and should be submitted on or before February 3, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-325 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53053; File No. SR-OCC-2003-13] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Establish a Comprehensive Standard of Care and Limitation of Liability With Respect to Clearing Members January 5, 2006. I. Introduction On November 5, 2003, The Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) and on August 18, 2004, amended 1 proposed rule change SR-OCC-2003-13 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”). 2 Notice of the proposal was published in the **Federal Register** on November 23, 2005. 3 No comment letters were received. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving the proposed rule change. 1 Letter from William H. Navin, Executive Vice President, General Counsel, and Secretary, OCC (August 17, 2005). 2 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52783 (November 16, 2005), 70 FR 70910. II. Description In its 1980 release setting forth standards for registration of clearing agencies, the Commission's Division of Market Regulation stated that it was “of the view that clearing agencies should undertake to perform their obligations with a high degree of care.” 4 In its 1983 order registering nine clearing agencies, the Commission stated that it did “not believe sufficient justification exists at this time to require a unique federal standard of care for registered clearing agencies.” 5 The Commission has left to user-governed clearing agencies the question of how to allocate losses associated with, among other things, clearing agency functions. Along this line, in its 1986 order approving a proposed rule change of the Midwest Securities Trust Company (“MSTC”) to clarify the rights and liabilities of MSTC and its participants with respect to certain services, the Commission stated: 4 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 16900 (June 17, 1980), 45 FR 45167 (June 23, 1980). 5 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 20221 (September 23, 1983), 48 FR 45167 (October 3, 1983). The Act does not specify the standard of care that must be exercised by registered clearing agencies and the Commission has determined that imposition of a unique federal standard of care for registered clearing agencies is not appropriate at this time. [citing Securities Exchange Act Release No. 20221, *supra* note 6] For those reasons the Commission believes that the clearing agency standard of care and the allocation of rights and responsibilities between a clearing agency and its participants applicable to clearing agency services generally may be set by the clearing agency and its participants. The Commission believes it should review clearing agency proposed rule changes in this area on a case-by-case basis and balance the need for a high degree of clearing agency care with the effect resulting liabilities may have on clearing agency operations, costs, and safeguarding of securities and funds. 6 6 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 22940 (February 24, 1986), 51 FR 7169 (February 28, 1986). Because standards of care represent an allocation of rights and liabilities between a clearing agency and its users, which are generally sophisticated financial entities, the Commission has continued to refrain from establishing a unique federal standard of care and has allowed clearing agencies and other self-regulatory organizations and their users to establish their own standards of care. 7 7 *See, e.g.* , Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51669 (May 9, 2005), 70 FR 25634 (May 13, 2005) [File No. SR-NSCC-2004-09]; 48201 (July 21, 2003), 68 FR 44128 (July 25, 2003) [File No. SR-GSCC-2002-10]; 37563 (August 14, 1996), 61 FR 43285 (August 21, 1996) [SR-PSE-96-21]; and 37421 (July 11, 1996), 61 FR 37513 (July 18, 1996) [SR-CBOE-96-02]. With this rule change, OCC is establishing a comprehensive gross negligence standard of care and limitation of liability with respect to its clearing members. In connection with this filing, OCC has made the following representations. OCC states in its original filing that since its founding in 1973, it has performed its clearing services with an exemplary level of care. Its record of fulfilling its commitments to its clearing members for over 30 years reflects OCC's commitment to serving the best interests of its clearing members. It has comprehensive systems and operating procedures in place to ensure that its clearing functions are executed with the highest level of accuracy. In addition to its own concern for accuracy, it is subject to extensive regulatory oversight by the Commission. Furthermore, in its amendment to the filing, OCC states that
(1)gross negligence is the standard of care generally used by other clearing agencies such as the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation,
(2)the decision to apply a gross negligence standard of care to OCC is a conscious allocation of risk between OCC and its members,
(3)the filing was unanimously approved by OCC's directors, a majority of whom are officers of clearing members, and
(4)the proposed rule change in no way will affect the very high level of care to which OCC has always held itself and to which it is held through the regulatory oversight of the Commission. 8 As such, OCC believes that a gross negligence standard of care is appropriate for OCC. 9 8 Letter from William H. Navin, *supra,* n. 1. 9 Specifically, OCC is amending Article VI of its By-Laws, “Clearance of Exchange Transactions,” by adding new Section 25, “Limitation of Liability,” which states:
(a)Notwithstanding any other provision in the By-Laws and Rules, the Corporation will not be liable for any action taken, or any delay or failure to take any action, under the By-Laws and Rules or otherwise, to fulfill the Corporation's obligations to its Clearing Members, other than for losses caused directly by the Corporation's gross negligence, willful misconduct, or violation of federal securities laws for which there is a private right of action. Under no circumstances will the Corporation be liable for the acts, delays, omissions, bankruptcy, or insolvency of any third party, including, without limitation, any bank or other depository, custodian, sub-custodian, clearing or settlement system, data communication service, or other third party, unless the Corporation was grossly negligent, engaged in willful misconduct, or was in violation of federal securities laws for which there is a private right of action, in selecting such third party; and
(b)Under no circumstances will the Corporation be liable for any indirect, consequential, incidental, special, punitive or exemplary loss or damage (including, but not limited to, loss of business, loss of profits, trading losses, loss of opportunity and loss of use) however suffered or incurred, regardless of whether the Corporation has been advised of the possibility of such damages or whether such damages otherwise could have been foreseen or prevented. III. Discussion Section 19(b) of the Act directs the Commission to approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such organization. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in its custody or control. 10 The Commission believes that OCC's rule change is consistent with this Section because it will permit the resources of OCC to be appropriately utilized to protect funds and assets. 11 10 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F). 11 The Commission notes that OCC's adoption of a comprehensive gross negligence standard of care and limitation of liability with respect to its clearing members does not affect the regulatory standards ( *e.g.* , those set forth in Section 17A of the Act) that apply to OCC or the way in which OCC conducts its clearing agency operations. IV. Conclusion On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in particular Section 17A of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder. 12 12 The Commission notes that the rule change does not alleviate OCC from liability for violation of the Federal securities laws where there exists a private right of action and therefore is not designed to adversely affect OCC's compliance with the Federal securities laws and private rights of action that exist for violations of the Federal securities laws. *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-OCC-2003-13) be and hereby is approved. For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 13 13 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-252 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53069; File No. SR-PCX-2006-01] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Minimum Price Variation for Entry of Orders for Equity Securities Traded on the Archipelago Exchange January 6, 2006. 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 January 4, 2006, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (“PCX” or “Exchange”), through its wholly owned subsidiary, PCX Equities, Inc. (“PCXE”), 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 Exchange. The PCX filed the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of the Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend its rules governing the Archipelago Exchange (“ArcaEx”), the equities trading facility of PCXE, to:
(1)Amend Commentary .04 to PCXE Rule 7.6 on minimum price variations for quoting and entry of orders in equity securities;
(2)delete Commentary .05 to PCXE Rule 7.6;
(3)renumber Commentary .06 to PCXE Rule 7.6 and correct a cross-reference in that Commentary; and
(4)delete Commentary .01 to PCXE Rule 6.16. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the PCX's Web site ( *http://www.pacificex.com* ), at the principal office of the PCX, 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 Exchange 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 Commission adopted Regulation NMS on April 6, 2005. 5 One of the new rules under Regulation NMS is Rule 612, Minimum Pricing Increment. That rule prohibits a national securities exchange, its members, and quotation vendors (among others) from displaying, ranking, or accepting a bid, offer, order, or indication of interest for any NMS stock that is priced in an increment smaller than $0.01 per share, unless it is priced less than $1.00 per share. 6 In the latter case, the exchange, its members, and its quotation vendors may display, rank, or accept a bid, offer, order, or indication of interest in the NMS stock in an increment no smaller than $0.0001 per share. 7 The compliance date for Rule 612 is January 31, 2006. 8 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005). Regulation NMS is comprised of the rules at 17 CFR 642.600-642.612. 6 *See* 17 CFR 242.612(a). 7 *See* 17 CFR 242.612(b). 8 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52196 (Aug. 2, 2005), 70 FR 45529 (Aug. 8, 2005). Currently, PCXE Rule 7.6, Commentary .04 provides that the minimum price variation (“MPV”) for quoting and entering orders in equity securities traded on ArcaEx is $0.01 per share, with the exception of securities priced less than $1.00 per share, in which case, on a pilot basis through September 30, 2005, the MPV is $0.001 per share. PCXE Rule 7.6, Commentary .05 provides that PCXE will round such sub-penny prices to whole penny increments, by rounding the bid down to the next whole penny and rounding the offer up to the next whole penny, and will display the rounded quotes in the consolidated quotation system without a rounding identifier. With this filing, the Exchange is seeking to amend PCXE Rule 7.6, Commentary .04 to provide that
(1)the Exchange will accept orders in equity securities traded on ArcaEx that are priced less than $1.00 per share in increments as small as $0.0001 per share, as permitted under Rule 612;
(2)it will round such orders to whole penny increments following the same rounding conventions described above; and
(3)it will display the rounded quotes in the consolidated quotation system. As currently provided in PCXE Rule 7.6, Commentary .04, the MPV for quoting and entering orders in equity securities traded on ArcaEx is $0.01 per share. The Exchange also proposes to delete Commentary .05 to PCXE Rule 7.6 and Commentary .01 to PCXE Rule 6.16 because they will become outdated when the amendments to PCXE Rule 7.6, Commentary .04 take effect, and to change the numbering of PCXE Rule 7.6, Commentary .06 to Commentary .05 and correct a cross-reference in that Commentary. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 9 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 10 in particular, in that it is designed to facilitate transactions in securities, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to enhance competition, and 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 Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the 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 30 days after the date of the filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 11 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 12 At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required by Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act, the Exchange also provided with the Commission with 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 the proposed rule change. A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing. 13 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay and allow the proposed rule change to become operative immediately. The Commission hereby grants that request. 14 The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because the proposal is consistent with the requirements of Rule 612 and waiving the operative delay will allow the PCX to meet the compliance deadline for Rule 612. 13 *See id.* 14 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 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-PCX-2006-01 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PCX-2006-01. 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 Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PCX-2006-01 and should be submitted on or before February 3, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-324 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53070; File No. SR-Phlx-2005-63 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order Granting Approval to Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Prohibition of Trade Shredding January 6, 2006. I. Introduction On October 25, 2005, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 the proposed rule change relating to the prohibition of trade shredding. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on December 5, 2005. 3 The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52834 (November 25, 2005), 70 FR 72492. II. Description of the Proposal The Exchange proposed to amend Rule 707, Conduct Inconsistent with Just and Equitable Principles of Trade, to prohibit members, member organizations and persons associated with or employed by a member or member organization from unbundling orders for execution for the primary purpose of maximizing a monetary or like payment to the member, member organization, or person associated with or employed by a member or member organization. III. Discussion and Commission Findings The Commission has reviewed carefully the proposed rule change and finds that it is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange, 4 particularly Section 6(b)(5) of the Act which, among other things, requires that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating securities transactions, to remove impediments to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 5 The Commission believes that the proposed rule change should help eliminate the distortive practice of trade shredding, and, therefore, promote just and equitable principles of trade. 4 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). IV. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 6 that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-Phlx-2005-63), be and hereby is, approved. 6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 7 7 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-256 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53088; File No. SR-Phlx-2005-87] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to a Proposed Rule Change, and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to the Exchange's Covered Sale Fee and Exchange Rule 607 January 6, 2006. 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 23, 2005, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission” or “SEC”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Phlx. On January 4, 2006, 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, and is approving the amended proposal on an accelerated basis. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 Amendment No. 1 made technical changes to the proposed rule text. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Phlx proposes to change the title from the “SEC Fee” to “Covered Sale Fee” as it appears on the Exchange's Summary of Equity Charges and the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock SM Fee Schedule (“Fee Schedule”). 4 The Exchange also proposes to amend Exchange Rule 607 to clarify the description of the Covered Sale Fee, including renaming the title of Phlx Rule 607 to “Covered Sale Fee” and providing a more complete description of a new arrangement for passing fees among Intermarket Trading System (“ITS”) participants. Below is the text of the proposed rule change, as amended. Proposed new language is in italics; proposed deletions are in brackets. 4 The Nasdaq-100®, Nasdaq-100 Index®, Nasdaq®, The Nasdaq Stock Market®, Nasdaq-100 Shares SM , Nasdaq-100 Trust SM , Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock SM , and QQQ SM are trademarks or service marks of The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (“Nasdaq”) and have been licensed for use for certain purposes by the Phlx pursuant to a license agreement with Nasdaq. The Nasdaq-100 Index® (“Index”) is determined, composed, and calculated by Nasdaq without regard to the Licensee, the Nasdaq-100 Trust SM , or the beneficial owners of Nasdaq-100 Shares SM . Nasdaq has complete control and sole discretion in determining, comprising, or calculating the Index or in modifying in any way its method for determining, comprising, or calculating the Index in the future. Rule 607. [Transaction] *Covered Sale* Fee *Under Section 31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Exchange must pay certain fees to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”). To help fund the Exchange's obligations to the Commission under Section 31, a Covered Sale Fee is assessed by the Exchange to members and member organizations. To the extent there may be any excess monies collected under this Rule, the Exchange may retain those monies to help fund its general operating expenses.* [Every member and member organization shall pay to the Exchange in such manner and at such time as the Exchange shall direct, the fees specified in Section 31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and rules thereunder, for all sales upon the Exchange of securities specified in Section 31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and rules thereunder.] *Each member and member organization engaged in executing sale transactions on the Exchange or executing transactions, which were routed over the Intermarket Trading System, on another exchange during any computational period shall pay a Covered Sale Fee equal to
(i)the Section 31 fee rate multiplied by
(ii)the member's aggregate dollar amount of covered sales.* *The Exchange may enter into arrangements with other exchanges to pass the Covered Sale Fee among the applicable exchanges where the Exchange has collected the Covered Sale Fee from its members and member organizations for sale transactions executed on another exchange through the Intermarket Trading System and when other exchanges have collected the Covered Sale Fee from its members for sale transactions executed on the Exchange through the Intermarket Trading System.* SUMMARY OF EQUITY CHARGES (p 2/3)* [SEC FEE] *Covered Sale Fee* [The amount shall be determined by Section 31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.] *Each member and member organization engaged in executing sale transactions on the Exchange or executing transactions, which were routed over the Intermarket Trading System, on another exchange during any computational period shall pay a Covered Sale Fee equal to
(i)the Section 31 fee rate multiplied by
(ii)the member's aggregate dollar amount of covered sales.* NASDAQ-100 INDEX TRACKING STOCK SM FEE SCHEDULE PHLX FEE SCHEDULE [SEC FEE] *Covered Sale* Fee [The amount shall be determined by Section 31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.] *Each member and member organization engaged in executing sale transactions on the Exchange or executing transactions, which were routed over the Intermarket Trading System, on another exchange during any computational period shall pay a Covered Sale Fee equal to
(i)the Section 31 fee rate multiplied by
(ii)the member's aggregate dollar amount of covered sales.* 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 Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change, as amended, and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change, as amended. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item III 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 changing the name of the “SEC Fee” as it appears on the Exchange's fee schedule and in Phlx Rule 607 is to conform with the Commission's request to rename this fee to help clarify that members and member organizations do not incur an obligation to the Commission under Section 31 of the Act and to help minimize confusion in connection with the Exchange's assessment of the fee. In addition, the amendments to Rule 607 reflect the new arrangements with respect to the passing of fees among ITS participants that each collects from its respective members for transactions executed on another SRO through ITS. Background In late June 2004, the Commission established new procedures governing the calculation, payment, and collection of fees and assessments on securities transactions owed by national securities exchanges and national securities associations (collectively “SROs”) to the Commission pursuant to Section 31 of the Act. 5 In connection with these new procedures, the Commission expressed its concern about the manner in which SROs labeled the fees that they passed to their members and the manner in which members labeled the fees passed to their customers. Because Section 31 does not place an obligation on members of covered SROs or their customers, the Commission stated its belief that it is misleading to suggest that a customer or an SRO member incurred an obligation to the Commission under Section 31. Accordingly, the Commission requested that SROs take action to correct any such misperception, which would include changing the title of the “SEC Fee” as it appears on the Exchange's fee schedule. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49928 (June 28, 2004), 69 FR 41060 (July 7, 2004). Thus, in order to comply with the Commission's request and to minimize any confusion relating to the assessment of the fee, the Exchange proposes to rename its “SEC Fee” and Phlx Rule 607 “Transaction Fee” to “Covered Sale Fee.” 6 6 Pursuant to Rule 31 under the Act, 17 CFR 240.31, a covered sale is a sale of a security, other than an exempt sale or a sale of a security future, occurring on a national securities exchange or by or through any member of a national securities association otherwise than on a national securities exchange. ITS Collection In addition, the Exchange recently filed with, and received an SEC order granting accelerated approval from, the Commission to enter into arrangements with other participating SROs to pass certain fees they have collected from members for transactions executed on another exchange through the ITS. 7 Participating SROs have entered into an arrangement to pass fees among ITS participants that each participating SRO has collected from its members for sale transactions executed on another participating SRO through ITS. Pursuant to this new arrangement, each ITS participant will determine whether it has received and executed more in dollar value of covered sales than it has originated and sent to each other ITS participant. 8 One participating SRO will then deduct the amount it owes another participating SRO and will invoice only for the difference; however, the duty to report and pay the Section 31 fee will remain with the ITS participant SRO on which the sale was in fact transacted. It is anticipated that the invoicing process will occur twice yearly to coincide with the March 15 and September 30 payment schedule for Section 31 fees set forth in the Act. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52745 (November 7, 2005), 70 FR 69182, (November 14, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-64). 8 For example, for the period September 2003 through August 2004, SRO A sent ITS commitments for covered sales whose dollar value was $150 million to SRO B for execution. SRO A collected fees from its members to fund its Section 31 obligation for those covered sales executed on SRO B. Under the new procedures established by the Commission for the calculation and collection of Section 31 fees on such covered sales, SRO B, as the executing market center, is obligated to pay the Section 31 fee to the Commission. NSCC Collection and Computational Period The Exchange intends to have the National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”) collect this fee (and other Exchange fees) for the Exchange for certain members and member organizations and pay over to the Exchange the funds collected in connection with equity transactions, which should increase the efficiency in which this fee, as well as other Exchange fees, are collected. 9 Further, the Exchange intends to have the Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) continue to bill and collect this fee in connection with covered sales of options. 10 9 Currently, NSCC collects the fee on the 23rd calendar day of each month, provided that if such day is other than an NSCC business/settlement day, on the next succeeding NSCC business/settlement day. The Exchange implemented this collection practice in November 2005, which covered transactions that occurred in October 2005. For equity transactions, the NSCC debits the Phlx member's or member organization's clearing firm. If an Exchange member clears through the Stock Clearing Corporation of Philadelphia (“SCCP”), a Phlx subsidiary, the Exchange will debit the member's or member organizations' margin account at SCCP. 10 Currently, OCC and the options exchanges, including the Phlx, have established arrangements whereby OCC tabulates the aggregate amount of sales of options that occur on the exchanges, based on data captured by OCC's systems. OCC then calculates the Section 31 fees owed by the exchanges and, in turn, remits to the Commission the Section 31 fees on behalf of these exchanges. The computational period, referred to in proposed Rule 607 above, may change during the course of a year if there is a change in the Section 31 fee rate. 11 Thus, the amount of the Section 31 fee may change during the year, which would, in turn, start a new computational period. The Exchange determines whether a trade “occurs” before or after a fee rate change so that the appropriate dollar amounts of securities sales are multiplied by the correct fee rate. 11 The Commission is required to adjust the securities transaction fee rates on an annual basis, after consultation with the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget. The Commission may also be required to make a “mid-year” adjustment to the Section 31 fee rate. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with and furthers the objective of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 12 which requires that the rules of an exchange provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change, as amended, 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 No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change, as amended. III. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2005-87 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2005-87. 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, as amended, 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 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 Number SR-Phlx-2005-87 and should be submitted on or before February 3, 2006. IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto The Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 13 In particular, the Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 14 which requires that the rules of an exchange provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers, and other persons using its facilities. 13 In approving this proposal, as amended, the Commission has considered its impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). Under Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 15 the Commission may not approve any proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after the date of publication of the notice of filing thereof, unless the Commission finds good cause for so doing. The Commission hereby finds good cause for approving the proposed rule change, as amended, prior to the thirtieth day after publishing notice of filing thereof in the **Federal Register** . The Commission believes that such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. This proposal will make the Exchange's rules consistent with the Commission's guidance on Section 31 without undue delay. The proposal also codifies the current Exchange arrangement for passing the Covered Sale Fees between the ITS participants. Therefore, the Commission believes that proposed rule change, as amended, raises no new regulatory issues and that a full notice-and-comment period is not necessary. 15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 16 that the proposed rule change, as amended (SR-Phlx-2005-87), is hereby approved on an accelerated basis. 16 *Id.* For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 17 17 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-257 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53078; File No. SR-Phlx-2005-88] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Elimination of the 500 Contract Cap on Payment for Order Flow Fees January 9, 2006. 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 23, 2005, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Phlx has designated this proposal as one changing a fee imposed by the Phlx under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Phlx proposes to eliminate the 500-contract cap per individual cleared side of a transaction which is currently imposed in connection with the Exchange's equity options payment for order flow program. 5 The Exchange states that the elimination of the 500-contract cap would be scheduled to become effective for trades settling on or after January 2, 2006. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52568 (October 6, 2005), 70 FR 60120 (October 14, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-58). Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed deletions are in [brackets]. Summary of Equity Option Charges (p. 3/6) For any top 120 option listed after February 1, 2004 and for any top 120 option acquired by a new specialist unit ** within the first 60-days of operations, the following thresholds will apply, with a cap of $10,000 for the first 4 full months of trading per month per option provided that the total monthly market share effected on the Phlx in that top 120 Option is equal to or greater than 50% of the volume threshold in effect: First full month of trading: 0% national market share. Second full month of trading: 3% national market share. Third full month of trading: 6% national market share. Fourth full month of trading: 9% national market share. Fifth full month of trading (and thereafter): 12% national market share. ** A new specialist unit is one that is approved to operate as a specialist unit by the Options Allocation, Evaluation, and Securities Committee on or after February 1, 2004 and is a specialist unit that is not currently affiliated with an existing options specialist unit as reported on the member organization's Form BD, which refers to direct and indirect owners, or as reported in connection with any other financial arrangement, such as is required by Exchange Rule 783. Real-Time Risk Management Fee $.0025 per contract for firms/members receiving information on a real-time basis. Equity Option Payment for Order Flow Fees *
(1)For trades resulting from either Directed or non-Directed Orders that are delivered electronically and executed on the Exchange: Assessed on ROTs, specialists and Directed ROTs on those trades when the specialist unit or Directed ROT elects to participate in the payment for order flow program.***
(2)No payment for order flow fees will be assessed on trades that are not delivered electronically. QQQQ (NASDAQ-100 Index Tracking Stock SM )—$0.75 per contract. Remaining Equity Options, except FXI Options—$0.60 per contract. * Assessed on transactions resulting from customer orders[, subject to a 500-contract cap, per individual cleared side of transaction]. This proposal will be in effect for trades settling on or after October 1, 2005 and will remain in effect as a pilot program that is scheduled to expire on May 27, 2006. *** Any excess payment for order flow funds billed but not utilized by the specialist or Directed ROT will be carried forward unless the Directed ROT or specialist elects to have those funds rebated to the applicable ROT, Directed ROT or specialist on a pro rata basis, reflected as a credit on the monthly invoices. See Appendix A for additional fees. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Phlx included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Phlx 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 According to the Phlx, currently, the following payment for order flow rates are in effect at the Exchange:
(1)Equity options other than QQQQ 6 and FXI Options are assessed $0.60 per contract;
(2)options on QQQQ are assessed $0.75 per contract; and
(3)no payment for order flow fees are assessed on FXI Options. Trades resulting from either Directed or non-Directed Orders that are delivered electronically over AUTOM and executed on the Exchange are assessed a payment for order flow fee, while non-electronically-delivered orders ( *i.e.* , represented by a floor broker) are not assessed a payment for order flow fee. 7 The Exchange also imposes a 500-contract cap per individual cleared side of a transaction. 6 The Nasdaq-100®, Nasdaq-100 Index®, Nasdaq®, The Nasdaq Stock Market®, Nasdaq-100 Shares SM , Nasdaq-100 Trust SM , Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock SM , and QQQ SM are trademarks or service marks of The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (“Nasdaq”) and have been licensed for use for certain purposes by the Phlx pursuant to a License Agreement with Nasdaq. The Nasdaq-100 Index® (“Index”) is determined, composed, and calculated by Nasdaq without regard to the Licensee, the Nasdaq-100 Trust SM , or the beneficial owners of Nasdaq-100 Shares SM . The Exchange states that Nasdaq has complete control and sole discretion in determining, comprising, or calculating the Index or in modifying in any way its method for determining, comprising, or calculating the Index in the future. 7 The Phlx states that electronically-delivered orders do not include orders delivered through the Floor Broker Management System pursuant to Exchange Rule 1063. At this time, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the 500-contract cap per individual cleared side of a transaction. The Phlx states that the purpose of this proposal is to remain competitive with other options payment for order flow programs in place at other exchanges that do not cap payment for order flow fees collected on a per order or trade basis. 8 The Exchange represents that no other changes to the Exchange's payment for order flow program are being proposed at this time. 8 See, *e.g.* , Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52024 (July 13, 2005), 70 FR 41806 (July 20, 2005) (SR-PCX-2005-82). Telephone conversation between Cynthia K. Hoekstra, Director, Exchange, and Michou Nguyen, Attorney, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, on January 9, 2006. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its schedule of fees is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 9 in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) of the Act 10 in particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among the Phlx's members. 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 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 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 either solicited or received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change has been designated as a fee change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 11 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 12 thereunder, because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange. Accordingly, the proposal will take effect upon filing with the Commission. At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2005-88 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2005-88. 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 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 Number SR-Phlx-2005-88 and should be submitted on or before February 3, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 13 13 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-326 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5272] Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Degas, Sickert, and Toulouse-Lautrec: London and Paris” SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, *et seq.* ; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, *et seq.* ), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the exhibition “Degas, Sickert, and Toulouse-Lautrec: London and Paris, 1870-1910”, imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at The Phillips Collection, from on or about February 18, 2006, until on or about May 14, 2006, and at possible additional venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Paul Manning, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202/453-8052). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001. Dated: January 9, 2006. C. Miller Crouch, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E6-331 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5273] Bureau of Political-Military Affairs; Statutory Debarment Under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Department of State has imposed statutory debarment pursuant to section 127.7(c) of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”) (22 CFR Parts 120 to 130) on persons convicted of violating or conspiring to violate section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (“AECA”) (22 U.S.C. 2778). EFFECTIVE DATE: Date of conviction as specified for each person. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Trimble, Director, Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Department of State
(202)663-2700. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 38(g)(4) of the AECA, 22 U.S.C. 2778, prohibits licenses and other approvals for the export of defense articles or defense services to be issued to persons, or any party to the export, who have been convicted of violating certain statutes, including the AECA. In implementing this section of the AECA, the Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs is authorized by section 127.7 of the ITAR to prohibit any person who has been convicted of violating or conspiring to violate the AECA from participating directly or indirectly in the export of defense articles, including technical data or in the furnishing of defense services for which a license or other approval is required. This prohibition is referred to as “statutory debarment.” Statutory debarment is based solely upon conviction in a criminal proceeding, conducted by a United States Court, and as such the administrative debarment proceedings outlined in Part 128 of the ITAR are not applicable. The period for debarment will be determined by the Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs based on the underlying nature of the violations, but will generally be for three years from the date of conviction. At the end of the debarment period, licensing privileges may be reinstated only at the request of the debarred person following the necessary interagency consultations, after a thorough review of the circumstances surrounding the conviction, and a finding that appropriate steps have been taken to mitigate any law enforcement concerns, as required by section 38(g)(4) of the AECA. Unless licensing privileges are reinstated, however, the person remains debarred. Department of State policy permits debarred persons to apply to the Director, Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance, for reinstatement beginning one year after the date of the debarment, in accordance with section 38(g)(4) of the AECA and section 127.11(b) of the ITAR. Any decision to grant reinstatement can be made only after the statutory requirements under section 38(g)(4) of the AECA have been satisfied. Exceptions, also known as transaction exceptions, may be made to this debarment determination on a case-by-base basis at the discretion of the Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs. However, such an exception would be granted only after a full review of all circumstances, paying particular attention to the following factors: whether an exception is warranted by overriding U.S. foreign policy or national security interests; whether an exception would further law enforcement concerns that are consistent with the foreign policy or national security interests of the United States; or whether other compelling circumstances exist that are consistent with the foreign policy or national security interests of the United States, and that do not conflict with law enforcement concerns. Even if exceptions are granted, the debarment continues until subsequent reinstatement. Pursuant to section 38 of the AECA and section 127.7 of the ITAR, the Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs has statutorily debarred the following persons for a period of three years following the date of their AECA conviction:
(1)Jesus Arredondo-Sanchez (a.k.a. Jesus Arredondo), June 21, 2004, U.S. District Court, District of Arizona (Phoenix), Case #: CR 03-00524-001-PHX-FJM.
(2)Omar Carrillo, October 7, 1999, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas (Laredo), Case #: 5:99CR00241-001.
(3)Carlos Alberto Correa-Arango, August 31, 2005, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida (Miami), Case #: 05-60122-CR-HUCK.
(4)Kozo Wada, June 9, 2005, U.S. District Court, District of Oregon (Portland), Case #: Cr. 03-96-BR.
(5)Atallah Adwani, September 24, 2003, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio (Cincinnati), Case #: CR-1-02-71-1.
(6)Summit Marketing, Inc., October 24, 1997, U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts (Boston), Case #: 1:96CR10326-002-REK. As noted above, at the end of the three-year period, the above named persons/entities remain debarred unless licensing privileges are reinstated. Debarred persons are generally ineligible to participate in activity regulated under the ITAR (see *e.g.* , sections 120.1(c) and (d), and 127.11(a)). The Department of State will not consider applications for licenses or requests for approvals that involve any person who has been convicted of violating or of conspiring to violate the AECA during the period of statutory debarment. Persons who have been statutorily debarred may appeal to the Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security for reconsideration of the ineligibility determination. A request for reconsideration must be submitted in writing within 30 days after a person has been informed of the adverse decision, in accordance with 22 CFR Sections 127.7(d) and 128.13(a). This notice is provided for purposes of making the public aware that the persons listed above are prohibited from participating directly or indirectly in any brokering activities and in any export from or temporary import into the United States of defense articles, related technical data, or defense services in all situations covered by the ITAR. Specific case information may be obtained from the Office of the Clerk for the U.S. District Courts mentioned above and by citing the court case number where provided. This notice involves a foreign affairs function of the United States encompassed within the meaning of the military and foreign affairs exclusion of the Administrative Procedure Act. Because the exercise of this foreign affairs function is discretionary, it is excluded from review under the Administrative Procedure Act. Dated: January 9, 2006. John Hillen, Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E6-330 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-25-P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE Generalized System of Preferences (GSP): Notice of Closure of Case 013-CP-05, Protection of Intellectual Property in Brazil, in the 2005 Annual Country Practice Review AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces closure of the review for case 013-CP-05, Protection of Intellectual Property in Brazil. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Marideth Sandler, Executive Director of the GSP Program, Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), Room F-220, 1724 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508. The telephone number is
(202)395-6971 and the facsimile number is
(202)395-9481. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The GSP program provides for the duty-free importation of designated articles when imported from beneficiary developing countries. The GSP program is authorized by Title V of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2461, *et seq.* ), as amended (the “Trade Act”), and is implemented in accordance with Executive Order 11888 of November 24, 1975, as modified by subsequent Executive Orders and Presidential Proclamations. In the 2005 Annual Review, the GSP Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee
(TPSC)is reviewing petitions concerning the country practices of certain beneficiary developing countries of the GSP program. As a result of that review, the TPSC has decided to close the review for case 013-CP-05 regarding protection of intellectual property rights in Brazil. The Petitioner was the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA). The results of other ongoing country practice reviews in the 2005 Annual Review will be announced in the **Federal Register** at a later date. Marideth J. Sandler, Executive Director, GSP Program. [FR Doc. 06-368 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 16
Traces to 16 documents
6 references not yet in our index
  • 15 USC 78
  • 17 CFR 240.12
  • 17 CFR 240.19
  • 17 CFR 240
  • 17 CFR 642.600-642
  • 79 Stat. 985
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice
C.F.R.§ 200.30-3
U.S.C.§ 78s
U.S.C.§ 78f
U.S.C.§ 552
U.S.C.§ 78q–1
C.F.R.§ 242.612
U.S.C.§ 78c
C.F.R.§ 240.31
U.S.C.§ 2459
Cite15 USC 78
Cite17 CFR 240.12
Cite17 CFR 240.19
Cites 22 · 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.