Notices. Notice of public meeting

21,765 words·~99 min read·/register/2006/05/25/06-4861·

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

BILLING CODE 4510-28-C DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Investigations Regarding Certifications of Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance Petitions have been filed with the Secretary of Labor under Section 221(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (“the Act”) and are identified in the Appendix to this notice. Upon receipt of these petitions, the Director of the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, has instituted investigations pursuant to Section 221(a) of the Act.

The purpose of each of the investigations is to determine whether the workers are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Title II, Chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations will further relate, as appropriate, to the determination of the date on which total or partial separations began or threatened to begin and the subdivision of the firm involved. The petitioners or any other persons showing a substantial interest in the subject matter of the investigations may request a public hearing, provided such request is filed in writing with the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than June 5, 2006.

Interested persons are invited to submit written comments regarding the subject matter of the investigations to the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than June 5, 2006. The petitions filed in this case are available for inspection at the Office of the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room C-5311, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210.

Signed at Washington, DC this 17th day of May 2006. Erica R. Cantor, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. Appendix [Appendix 55 TAA petitions instituted between 5/8/06 and 5/12/06] TA-W Subject firm (petitioners) Location Date of institution Date of petition 59336 Carolina Mills Inc

(Comp)Statesville, NC 05/08/06 05/04/06 59337 Carolina Mills Inc

(Comp)Maiden, NC 05/08/06 05/04/06 59338 International Paper Co. (Union) Cantonment, FL 05/08/06 05/05/06 59339 Northern Technologies (State) Pocahontas, AR 05/08/06 05/04/06 59340 Billings Transportation Co.

(Comp)Lexington, NC 05/08/06 05/03/06 59341 STERIS Corporation

(UAW)Erie, PA 05/08/06 05/04/06 59342 Sheridan Industries Inc. (State) Albion, MI 05/08/06 05/04/06 59343 NABCO Inc

(Comp)Reed City, MI 05/08/06 05/05/06 59344 Factory Screen Works

(Comp)King, NC 05/08/06 05/05/06 59345 Theramatrix Physical Therapy and Services Inc

(Wkrs)Hapeville, GA 05/08/06 05/05/06 59346 Sonoco Products Co.

(Comp)Charlotte, NC 05/08/06 05/05/06 59347 Health Fitness Corp.

(Wrks)Minneapolis, MN 05/08/06 04/27/06 59348 Ardisam, Inc.

(Comp)Cumberland, WI 05/08/06 05/04/06 59349 P.H. Glatfelter Co.

(Comp)Neenah, WI 05/08/06 05/05/06 59350 Central Minnesota Tool and Stamping (State) Little Falls, MN 05/08/06 05/05/06 59351 Southern Oregon Lumber

(Wkrs)Central Point, OR 05/08/06 05/04/06 59352 Town of Calhoun Falls

(Comp)Calhoun Falls, SC 05/08/06 04/14/06 59353 Auburn Technology Inc

(Comp)Auburn, NY 05/08/06 05/05/06 59354 Atlas Engineering

(Comp)Kent, OH 05/08/06 05/02/06 59355 Quebecor World Inc. (Union) Brookfield, WI 05/09/06 05/08/06 59356 Masonite Corporation

(Comp)Corning, CA 05/09/06 05/08/06 59357 Dole Fruit Co.

(Comp)Gulfport, MS 05/09/06 05/08/06 59358 Cenveo-Waterbury

(Wkrs)Waterbury, CT 05/09/06 04/26/06 59359 Science Applications International Corp.

(SAIC)(State) Piscataway, NJ 05/09/06 05/08/06 59360 Smurfit Stone Company

(Wkrs)Mansfield, MA 05/09/06 05/08/06 59361 Columbian Chemicals Company

(Comp)Proctor, WV 05/09/06 05/08/06 59362 Mount Vernon Mills

(Comp)Trion, GA 05/09/06 05/09/06 59363 Moore Wallace

(Comp)Iowa City, IA 05/10/06 04/28/06 59364 Galileo International Cendant Co. (State) Centennial, CO 05/10/06 05/04/06 59365 Napco Window Systems (Union) Sarver, PA 05/10/06 05/09/06 59366 Yorktowne Cabinetry (Union) Mifflinburg, PA 05/10/06 05/09/06 59367 United Technologies Corp.

(Comp)Carrollton, TX 05/10/06 05/09/06 59368 Formica Corporation

(Comp)Rocklin, CA 05/10/06 05/09/06 59369 3M Precision Optics

(Wkrs)Cincinnati, OH 05/10/06 05/06/06 59370 Universal Leaf of North America

(Wkrs)Danville, VA 05/10/06 04/24/06 59371 Sony Electronics

(Comp)San Diego, CA 05/10/06 04/21/06 59372 Sun Microsystems, Inc. (State) Santa Clara, CA 05/10/06 05/02/06 59373 North Gate Litho Print (State) Portland, OR 05/11/06 05/10/06 59374 Astec America

(Wkrs)Carlsbad, CA 05/11/06 05/10/06 59375 Eagle Picher (State) Hillsdale, MI 05/12/06 05/11/06 59376 Escalade Sports Inc. (IUECWA) Evansville, IN 05/12/06 05/09/06 59377 St. John (State) Irvine, CA 05/12/06 05/10/63 59378 Crossroads Industries Inc.

(Comp)Gaylord, MI 05/12/06 05/10/06 59379 E.K. Wood Products, Inc. (State) Barbourville, KY 05/12/06 05/10/06 59380 Siemens VDO (Union) Elkhart, IN 05/12/06 05/10/06 59381 Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corp.

(Wkrs)Newfield, NJ 05/12/06 05/11/06 59382 C.M. Holtzinger Fruit Co. Inc.

(Wkrs)Prosser, WA 05/12/06 05/08/06 59383 Herrin Maytag Laundry Products (State) Herrin, IL 05/12/06 05/11/06 59384 Wistron Infocomm

(Wkrs)Grapevine, TX 05/12/06 05/09/06 59385 G.E. Lighting

(Wkrs)Willoughby, OH 05/12/06 05/03/06 59386 Woodmaster Inc.

(Comp)St. Anthony, IN 05/12/06 04/27/06 59387 SKF USA Inc.

(Comp)Graniteville, SC 05/12/06 05/03/06 59388 Rose Art Industries Inc.

(Comp)Livingston, NJ 05/12/06 05/01/06 59389 Hirel Systems

(Comp)Kent, WA 05/12/06 05/04/06 59390 Eaton

(Wkrs)Phelps, NY 05/12/06 05/03/06 [FR Doc. E6-8061 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-58,780] Direct Source Industries, San Francisco, CA; Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration By letter dated April 10, 2006, a petitioner requested administrative reconsideration regarding the Department's Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance, applicable to the subject firm. The determination was issued on March 3, 2006. On March 24, 2006, the Notice of determination was published in the **Federal Register** (71 FR 14954). The denial was based on the Department's finding that the workers do not produce an article or support a domestic production facility. In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner asserts that, prior to the company's closure in October 2005, the workers were engaged in the production of garments (women's apparel). During the reconsideration investigation, a company official stated that the subject workers were engaged in various functions (cut, inspected, washed, and pressed etc.) related to the production of garments. Based on this information, the Department determines that the subject workers were engaged in the production of garment producers (women's and girls' tops). The investigation also revealed that aggregate U.S. imports of women's and girls tops increased significantly during the twelve month period ended June 2005 over the corresponding twelve month period ended June 2004 period. The ratio of aggregate United States imports of women's and girls' tops to United States shipments was well over 800 percent in 2004. The ratio increased significantly during the twelve month period ending June 2005. The investigation further revealed that sales, production and employment at the subject plant declined during the relevant period. In accordance with section 246 the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department herein presents the results of its investigation regarding certification of eligibility to apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

(ATAA)for older workers. In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for ATAA, the group eligibility requirements of section 246 of the Trade Act, as amended, must be met. The Department has determined in this case that the requirements of section 246 have been met. A significant number of workers at the firm are age 50 or over and possess skills that are not easily transferable. Competitive conditions within the industry are adverse. Conclusion After careful review of the information obtained in the reconsideration investigation, I determine that increases of imports of articles like or directly competitive with women's apparel produced by Direct Source Industries, San Francisco, California, contributed importantly to the total or partial separation of workers and to the decline in sales or production and at that firm or subdivision. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following certification: All workers of Direct Source Industries, San Francisco, California, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after February 2, 2005 through two years from the date of this certification, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended. Signed in Washington, DC this 17th day of May 2006. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E6-8055 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-59,241] Eagle Picher Automotive, Jonesville, MI; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on April 19, 2006 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Eagle Picher Automotive, Jonesville, Michigan. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 12th day of May, 2006. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E6-8060 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-59,385] G.E. Lighting; Willoughby Quartz Plant; Willoughby, OH; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on May 12, 2006, in response to a worker petition filed on behalf of workers at G.E. Lighting, Willoughby Quartz Plant, Willoughby, Ohio. The petitioning group of workers is covered by an earlier petition filed on April 28, 2006 (TA-W-59,292) that is the subject of an ongoing investigation for which a determination has not yet been issued. Further investigation in this case would duplicate efforts and serve no purpose; therefore the investigation under this petition has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 12th day of May 2006. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E6-8063 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-59,078] Hexion Specialty Chemicals, Inc. FFP Division Including On-Site Leased Workers of Express Personnel, High Point, NC; Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application of May 11, 2006, a worker requested administrative reconsideration of the Department of Labor's Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance, applicable to workers of the subject firm. The determination was issued on May 2, 2006. The Department's Notice of determination will soon be published in the **Federal Register** . Workers produce specialty wood adhesives and ancillary products. The negative determination was based on the Department's findings that the subject firm did not increase imports of wood adhesives and ancillary products or shift production of wood adhesives and ancillary products abroad, and that the subject firm's major declining customers did not increase imports of specialty wood adhesives and ancillary products during the relevant period. The worker alleges that the subject firm supplied wood adhesive to customers affected by increased imports of wood furniture. Following the issuance of the negative determination, the Department received information which indicates that it is possible that information provided to the Department regarding subject firm sales and production may be inaccurate and/or incomplete. The Department has carefully reviewed the request for reconsideration and all available information, and has determined that the Department will conduct further investigation based on new information provided by the worker and the company official. Conclusion After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted. Signed at Washington, DC, this 16th day of May 2006. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E6-8056 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-58,774] Innovex, Inc.; Litchfield, MN; Dismissal of Application for Reconsideration Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(C) an application for administrative reconsideration was filed with the Director of the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance for workers at Innovex, Inc., Litchfield, Minnesota. The application did not contain new information supporting a conclusion that the determination was erroneous, and also did not provide a justification for reconsideration of the determination that was based on either mistaken facts or a misinterpretation of facts or of the law. Therefore, dismissal of the application was issued. TA-W-58,774; Innovex, Inc., Litchfield, Minnesota (May 17, 2006) Signed at Washington, DC this 18th day of May 2006. Erica R. Cantor, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E6-8054 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-59,119] Nanston, Inc. Dental Lab, Norcross, GA; Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration By letter dated May 3, 2006 a petitioner requested administrative reconsideration regarding the Department's Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance, applicable to the workers of the subject firm. The initial investigation resulted in a negative determination signed on April 21, 2006 was based on the finding that imports of dentures, crowns and orthodontics work did not contribute importantly to worker separations at the subject plant and no shift of production to a foreign source occurred. The denial notice was published in the **Federal Register** on May 10, 2006 (71 FR 27291). To support the request for reconsideration, the petitioner supplied additional information regarding the outsourcing of production of dentures, crowns and orthodontics by the subject firm and imports of like or directly competitive products with those produced at the subject firm. A further contact with the company official revealed that the subject firm ceased production of dentures, crowns and orthodontics in order to outsource it to a domestic company which manufactures dentures, crowns and orthodontics abroad. A survey of the outsourced company revealed that a high portion of the products supplied to the subject firm are manufactured abroad and those imports of dentures, crowns and orthodontics have increased significantly during the relevant time period. The investigation revealed that outsourcing of the production abroad and increased imports of dentures, crowns and orthodontics contributed importantly to the declines in production and employment at the subject firm. In accordance with section 246 the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor herein presents the results of its investigation regarding certification of eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance

(1)The analysis and findings in the GEIS;

(2)the Environmental Report submitted by Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC;

(3)consultation with Federal, State, and local agencies;

(4)the staff's own independent review; and

(5)the staff's consideration of public comments, the recommendation of the staff is that the Commission determine that the adverse environmental impacts of license renewal for Nine Mile Point are not so great that preserving the option of license renewal for energy-planning decision makers would be unreasonable. The final Supplement 24 to the GEIS is publicly available at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, or from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room is accessible at *http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm.* The Accession Number for the final Supplement 24 to the GEIS is ML061290310. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC's PDR reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail at *pdr@nrc.gov.* In addition, the Penfield Library, located at State University of New York, Oswego, New York, 13126, has agreed to make the final Supplement 24 to the GEIS available for public inspection. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Mr. Samuel Hernandez, Environmental Branch B, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Mr. Hernandez may be contacted by telephone at 1-800-368-5642, extension 4049 or via e-mail at *SHQ@nrc.gov.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of May, 2006. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Michael Masnik, Acting Branch Chief, Environmental Branch B, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E6-8037 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Notice of Meeting The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste

(ACNW)will hold its 171st meeting on June 6-7, 2006, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The schedule for this meeting is as follows: Tuesday, June 6, 2006 *1 p.m.-1:15 p.m.: Opening Statement (Open)* —The ACNW Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting. *1:15 p.m.-3:15 p.m.: Overview of Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing (Open)* —A former ACNW Committee member will brief the ACNW on theory and technology used in the past to reprocess spent nuclear fuel. *3:30 p.m.-4:30 p.m.: NRC's spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing Regulation (Open)* —The NRC staff will update the Committee on the implications of a Department of Energy Nuclear fuel Recycling Program to NRC regulations concerning the licensing of spent nuclear fuel recycling facilities. *4:30 p.m.-5:30 p.m.: Overview of the Application of NRC Regulations to Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing (Open)* —The NRC staff will brief the Committee on potential changes to the regulatory process that may be needed to accommodate spent nuclear fuel reprocessing. *5:30 p.m.-6 p.m.: Discussion of Proposed White Paper (Open)* —The Committee will discuss the planning for scope and content of a potential ACNW White paper on spent nuclear fuel reprocessing. Wednesday, June 7, 2006 *8:30 a.m.-8:45 a.m.: Opening Remarks by the ACNW Chairman* (Open)—The ACNW Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting. *8:45 a.m.-4 p.m.: Miscellaneous (Open/Closed)* —The Committee will discuss matters related to the conduct of ACNW activities and specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings, as time and availability of information permit. Discussions may include future Committee Meetings. Note: A portion of this meeting may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b ( c)

(2)and

(6)to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to internal personnel rules and practices of ACNW, and information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACNW meetings were published in the **Federal Register** on October 11, 2005 (70 FR 59081). In accordance with these procedures, oral or written statements may be presented by members of the public. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Persons desiring to make oral statements should notify Mr. Michael R. Snodderly (Telephone 301-415-6927), between 8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, as far in advance as practicable so that appropriate arrangements can be made to schedule the necessary time during the meeting for such statements. Use of still, motion picture, and television cameras during this meeting will be limited to selected portions of the meeting as determined by the ACNW Chairman. Information regarding the time to be set aside for taking pictures may be obtained by contacting the ACNW office prior to the meeting. In view of the possibility that the schedule for ACNW meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend should notify Mr. Snodderly as to their particular needs. In accordance with Subsection 10(d) Public Law 92-463, I have determined that it is necessary to close portions of this meeting noted above to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to internal personnel rules and practices of ACNW, and information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, the Chairman's ruling on requests for the opportunity to present oral statements and the time allotted, therefore can be obtained by contacting Mr. Snodderly. ACNW meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room

(PDR)at *pdr@nrc.gov,* or by calling the PDR at 1-800-397-4209, or from the Publicly Available Records System component of NRC's document system (ADAMS) which is accessible from the NRC Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html* or *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/* (ACRS & ACNW Mtg schedules/agendas). Video Teleconferencing service is available for observing open sessions of ACNW meetings. Those wishing to use this service for observing ACNW meetings should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACNW Audiovisual Technician (301-415-8066), between 7:30 a.m. and 3:45 p.m. ET, at least 10 days before the meeting to ensure the availability of this service. Individuals or organizations requesting this service will be responsible for telephone line charges and for providing the equipment and facilities that they use to establish the video teleconferencing link. The availability of video teleconferencing services is not guaranteed. Dated: May 19, 2006. Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E6-8035 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting of the Joint ACRS Subcommittees on Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Human Factors; Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittees on Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment

(PRA)and Human Factors will hold a joint meeting on June 28, 2006, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: *Wednesday, June 28, 2006—8:30 a.m. until 3 p.m.* The joint Subcommittees will review three current human reliability assessment issues: the ATHEANA User's Guide, the application of ATHEANA to pressurized thermal shock, and comments received on the HRA Methods Evaluation NUREG. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and industry regarding this matter. The Subcommittees will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Eric A. Thornsbury (Telephone: 301-415-8716) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted. Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m.(ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. Dated: May 18, 2006. Michael R. Snodderly, Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW. [FR Doc. E6-8033 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems; Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittee on Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems will hold a meeting on June 27, 2006, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: *Tuesday, June 27, 2006—8:30 a.m. until the conclusion of business.* The Subcommittee plans to review the ongoing digital system risk program and the development of regulatory guidance on risk informed digital system reviews. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Eric A. Thornsbury, (Telephone: 301-415-8716) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted. Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m.(ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. Dated: May 18, 2006. Michael R. Snodderly, Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW. [FR Doc. E6-8034 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P PRESIDIO TRUST Notice of Public Meeting AGENCY: The Presidio Trust. ACTION: Notice of public meeting. SUMMARY: In accordance with section 103(c)(6) of the Presidio Trust Act, 16 U.S.C. 460bb note, Title I of Public Law 104-333, 110 Stat. 4097, as amended, and in accordance with the Presidio Trust's bylaws, notice is hereby given that a public meeting of the Presidio Trust Board of Directors will be held commencing 6:30 p.m. on Thursday, June 15, 2006, at the Golden Gate Club, 135 Fisher Loop, Presidio of San Francisco, California. The Presidio Trust was created by Congress in 1996 to manage approximately eighty percent of the former U.S. Army base known as the Presidio, in San Francisco, California. The purposes of this meeting are to approve minutes from the last Board meeting, to adopt a revised budget for Fiscal Year 2006, to provide an Executive Director's Report, to present the final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement in connection with the rehabilitation of the Public Health Service Hospital, and to receive public comment in accordance with the Trust's Public Outreach Policy. *Accommodation:* Individuals requiring special accommodation at this meeting, such as needing a sign language interpreter, should contact Mollie Matull at

(415)561-5300 prior to May 31, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Cook, General Counsel, the Presidio Trust, 34 Graham Street, P.O. Box 29052, San Francisco, California 94129-0052, Telephone:

(415)561-5300. Dated: May 22, 2006. Karen A. Cook, General Counsel. [FR Doc. E6-8114 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-4R-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:* Employee Representatives' Status and Compensation Reports.

(2)*Form(s) submitted:* DC-2a, DC-2.

(3)*OMB Number:* 3220-0014.

(4)*Expiration date of current OMB clearance:* 7/31/2006.

(5)*Type of request:* Extension of a currently approved collection.

(6)*Respondents:* Business or other for-profit.

(7)*Estimated annual number of respondents:* 65.

(8)*Total annual responses:* 65.

(9)*Total annual reporting hours:* 33.

(10)*Collection description:* Benefits are provided under the Railroad Retirement Act

(RRA)for individuals who are employee representatives as defined in section 1 of the RRA. The collection obtains information regarding the status of such individuals and their compensation. *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. E6-8050 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7905-01-P RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD Agency Forms Submitted for OMB Review *Summaary:* 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:* Employer's Deemed Service Month Questionnaire.

(2)*Form(s) submitted:* GL-99.

(3)*OMB Number:* 3220-0156.

(4)*Expiration date of current OMB clearance:* 8/31/2006.

(5)*Type of request:* Extension of a currently approved collection.

(6)*Respondents:* Business or other for-profit.

(7)*Estimated annual number of respondents:* 150.

(8)*Total annual responses:* 4,000.

(9)*Total annual reporting hours:* 133.

(10)*Collection description:* Under Section 3(i) of the Railroad Retirement Act, the Railroad Retirement Board may deem months of service in cases where an employee does not actually work in every month of the year. The collection obtains service and compensation information from railroad employers needed to determine if an employee may be credited with additional months of railroad service. *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. E6-8051 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7905-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53842; File No. SR-Amex-2006-45] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Prohibition Against the Entry of Multiple Options Orders May 19, 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 May 8, 2006, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a “non-controversial” rule change under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act, 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 5 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 5 The Amex has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay, as specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to revise Amex Rule 933—ANTE(e) prohibiting the entry via the Amex New Trading Environment system (“ANTE”) of multiple orders for any account of the same beneficial owner in the same option within any fifteen

(15)second period. The text of the proposed rule change appears below. Proposed deletions are in [brackets]. Rule 933—ANTE Automatic Matching and Execution of Options Orders (a)-(d) No change.

(e)The Options Trading Committee shall determine the size parameters of orders eligible for automatic matching and execution. The Committee may determine to set the eligible order size parameter in any option class as the disseminated quote size. [An automatic matching and execution eligible order for any account in which the same person is directly or indirectly interested may only be entered at intervals of no less than 15 seconds between entry of each such order in a call class and/or a put class for the same option. Members and member organizations are responsible for establishing procedures to prevent orders in a call class and/or a put class for the same option for any account in which the same person is directly or indirectly interested from being entered at intervals of less than 15 seconds.] (f)-(g) No change. Commentary * * * No change. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange proposes to revise Amex Rule 933—ANTE(e) in order to increase the number of orders handled through ANTE. Currently, Amex Rule 933—ANTE(e) prohibits the entry of multiple orders for any account of the same beneficial owner in the same option class within any fifteen

(15)second period. The original purpose of the Rule in connection with the Exchange's Automatic Execution System (“Auto-Ex”) 6 was to assist Exchange specialists and Registered Options Traders (“ROTs”) in managing their risk of multiple executions of orders delivered in rapid succession. Prior to the introduction of ANTE, specialists and ROTs would find it very difficult to timely revise their quotations. As a result, the Exchange, as well as the other options exchanges, at that time adopted rules to prohibit the entry of multiple orders for any account of the same beneficial owner within fifteen

(15)seconds. The purpose of the Rule was to protect investors and other market participants from the potential negative consequences that might result from Order Entry Firms or off-floor broker-dealers “picking off” specialists and/or ROTs. The Exchange believed that if persons were allowed to effectively increase the size of Auto-Ex eligible orders by entering more than one such order at intervals of less than 15 seconds, Amex specialists and ROTs would be unable to make markets with the same liquidity as if there were effective limits on the size and frequency of Auto-Ex eligible orders. 6 The Auto-Ex system was established to provide small customer orders with an immediate single price execution. The Amex has substantially improved its electronic trading systems such that the risk associated with multiple orders in the same option delivered for any account of the same or an affiliated beneficial account holder has become more manageable through electronic means. Specifically, ANTE now allows specialists and ROTs to submit proprietary electronic quotes through ANTE and to revise their quotes electronically, which reduces the risk of multiple executions of orders delivered in rapid succession before the specialist or ROT is able to revise its quotation. In addition, a revised and updated version of ANTE has incorporated a risk management tool to allow specialists and ROTs to set criteria for the system to adjust their quotes (the “Quote Risk Manager”) if a certain number of trades are executed within a certain period of time. The Commission recently approved the Exchange's Quote Risk Manager. 7 Due to the substantial increase in automated option order handling and risk mitigation tools provided by ANTE, the Amex submits that the fifteen

(15)second prohibition currently included in its Amex Rule 933—ANTE(e) is unnecessary. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53148 (January 19, 2006), 71 FR 4386 (January 26, 2006) (SR-Amex-2005-131). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 8 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 9 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the proposed rule change:

(i)Does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;

(ii)does not impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)by its terms, does not become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 10 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 11 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 filing of the proposed rule change. 12 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 12 *Id* . 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 on May 8, 2006, the date that it was filed with the Commission. 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 Commission has approved a similar proposed rule change by the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., 15 and thus the proposal does not raise any new regulatory issues. 13 *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). 15 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51827 (June 13, 2005), 70 FR 35491 (June 20, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-20). 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. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-Amex-2006-45 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 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Amex-2006-45. 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 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 No. SR-Amex-2006-45 and should be submitted on or before June 15, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 16 16 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-8052 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53836; File No. SR-BSE-2006-17] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Change Its Hours of Operation for Trading in Nasdaq Securities May 18, 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 May 1, 2006, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (“BSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The BSE filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). The BSE provided the Commission with written notice of its intention to file the proposed rule change on April 6, 2006. The BSE asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay. *See* 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The BSE proposes to amend Chapter XXXV, Trading in Nasdaq Securities, Section 7, Dealings On Floor—Hours. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the BSE Web site at *http://www.bostonstock.com* , at the Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission. 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 Exchange proposes to change its hours of operation for trading in Nasdaq Securities from 7 a.m. until 6:30 p.m., to 7 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. This change would decrease the Exchange's transacting of business in Nasdaq Securities during Nasdaq's after hours trading session by two hours, ending at 4:30 p.m. The BSE believes this change meets the current needs of its members. 2. Statutory Basis The BSE believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act, 5 in general, and Section 6(b)(5) 6 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and to protect investors and the public interest. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange 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 Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:

(i)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;

(ii)Impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)Become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 7 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 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. 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). The BSE has asked that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay contained in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act. 8 The Commission believes such waiver is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, for it will allow BSE to implement a change that meets the current needs of its members. For this reason, the Commission designates the proposal to be effective and operative upon filing with the Commission. 9 8 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 9 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-BSE-2006-17 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 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BSE-2006-17. 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 BSE. 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 the File Number SR-BSE-2006-17 and should be submitted on or before June 15, 2006. 10 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 10 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-7993 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53833; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-010] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to a Proposed Rule Change To Establish Certain Fees With Respect to Transactions Executed Through the Intermarket Trading System May 18, 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 May 15, 2006, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” 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 Nasdaq. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons, and is approving the proposal on an accelerated basis. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to enter into arrangements with other national securities exchanges to pass certain fees they have collected from members for transactions executed on another exchange through the Intermarket Trading System (“ITS”). This proposal does not require changes to Nasdaq rule text. Nasdaq will implement the proposed rule change immediately upon approval by the Commission. 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 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 Section 31 of the Act 3 requires each national securities exchange to pay the Commission a fee based on the aggregate dollar amount of certain sales of securities (“covered sales”). Rules 31 and 31T, adopted by the Commission in June 2004, 4 established procedures for the calculation and collection of Section 31 fees on such covered sales. Rule 31 requires each national securities exchange that owes Section 31 fees to submit a completed Form R31 to the Commission each month, beginning with July 2004. Rule 31T required each exchange to submit a completed Form R31 for each of the months September 2003 to June 2004, inclusive. Each national securities exchange must report its covered sales volume based on the data from a designated clearing agency, when available. The designated clearing agency for covered sales of equity securities is the National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”). These covered sales are reported in Part I of Form R31, and each exchange is required to “provide in Part I only the data supplied to it by a designated clearing agency.” 5 The data supplied by NSCC for the period September 2003 through August 2004 did not accurately reflect the aggregate dollar value of the covered sales occurring on each exchange to permit reports to be made in accordance with new Rules 31 and 31T. In particular, the data NSCC reported to each national securities exchange included non-covered sales data for sales originating on one exchange and executed on another exchange through the ITS. 6 3 15 U.S.C. 78ee. 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49928 (June 28, 2004), 69 FR 41060 (July 7, 2004) (“Adopting Release”). 5 17 CFR 240.31(b)(5). 6 As a result of this and other inaccuracies in the data reported by NSCC, the national securities exchanges were unable to report accurate information on Form R31, unless they made adjustments to the NSCC data based on data other than that provided by NSCC. On October 6, 2004, the Commission's Division of Market Regulation (“Division”) issued a “no-action” letter advising exchanges for whom NSCC acts as a designated clearing agency under Rule 31, that the Division staff would not recommend that the Commission take enforcement action if a national securities exchange adjusts the data provided by NSCC to accurately reflect covered sales occurring on the national securities exchange. *See* letter from Robert L.D. Colby, Deputy Director, Division, Commission to Ellen J. Neely, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (“CHX”), dated October 6, 2004. Section 31 requires that national securities exchanges pay a fee based on the aggregate dollar amount of sales of securities transacted on the exchange. Given the specific language of Section 31, the Commission in the Adopting Release for Rules 31 and 31T advised that the current methodology for treating sales of securities that occur through ITS 7 was no longer appropriate and that “it would be simpler and more transparent for each covered [self-regulatory organization (“SRO”)] to report all covered sales that occur on its market.” The Commission further stated: 7 In the Adopting Release, the Commission described the current methodology: “SRO A sends an ITS commitment to a member of SRO B to sell a security, and the commitment is executed on SRO B. Under existing arrangements, SRO A pays the Section 31 fee arising from this trade and passes the fee to its member that initiated the trade. * * * [T]he SROs devised this system because SRO B does not have the ability to require members of SRO A to reimburse it for the cost of its Section 31 fees.” Adopting Release, 69 FR at 41067. The Commission acknowledges that a covered SRO on which a covered sale occurs as a result of an incoming ITS order may not be able to collect funds to pay the Section 31 fee from one of its own members. However, Section 31 does not address the manner or extent to which covered SROs may seek to recover the amounts that they pay pursuant to Section 31 from their members. Covered SROs may wish to devise new arrangements for passing fees between themselves so that the funds are collected from the covered SRO that originated the ITS order. 8 8 *Id.* The Commission further noted that any such arrangements devised by the SROs would have to be established pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Act and Rule 19b-4 thereunder. Working through a subcommittee of the ITS Operating Committee 9 (“Subcommittee”), the national securities exchanges that are ITS participants devised new arrangements for passing fees between the ITS participants that were collected from their members. This proposed rule change is being submitted by Nasdaq based on the substantially similar rule change proposals submitted by other exchanges participating in the arrangement. 10 9 The ITS participants are American Stock Exchange LLC, Boston Stock Exchange (“BSE”), Chicago Board Options Exchange, CHX, National Association of Securities Dealers (“NASD”), National Stock Exchange, New York Stock Exchange, Pacific Exchange, and Philadelphia Stock Exchange. Nasdaq is now also an ITS participant. 10 *See, e.g.* , Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52593 (October 12, 2005), 70 FR 60584 (October 18, 2005) (SR-Amex-2005-083). NASD determined not to participate in the arrangement for passing fees between exchanges. Pursuant to the arrangement, each ITS participant exchange determines whether it has received and executed more in dollar value of covered sales than it has originated and sent to each other ITS participant exchange. For example, for the historical 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. SRO B, as the executing market center, is obligated to pay the Section 31 fee to the SEC. During the same period, SRO B sent ITS commitments for covered sales whose dollar value was $210 million to SRO A. SRO B collected fees from its members for those covered sales executed on SRO A. SRO A, as the executing market center, is obligated to pay the Section 31 fee to the SEC. Since SRO A executed a greater dollar value of covered sales from SRO B than it sent to SRO B, the proposed arrangement requires SRO A to determine the amount of the fees collected by SRO B from its members based on the aggregate dollar value of covered sales from SRO B and executed on SRO A through ITS commitments. When invoicing SRO B, SRO A will deduct the amount of the fee it owes to SRO B ( *i.e.* , the fee amount based on SRO A's $210 million in aggregate covered sales less the fee amount based on SRO B's $150 million in aggregate covered sales) and will invoice only for the difference of $60 million. The invoicing process under the arrangement occurs twice yearly to coincide with the March 15 and September 30 payment schedule for Section 31 fees set forth in the Act. To implement this proposed arrangement, an ITS participant exchange will require access to the aggregate dollar value of buy and sell transactions occurring through ITS. The Securities Industry Automation Corporation (“SIAC”) uses the ITS database that it maintains to provide reports of the aggregate dollar value of buy and sell transactions occurring through ITS to the ITS participants. The reports provided by SIAC are used by ITS participants in connection with determining which ITS participant will pay the fee for transactions occurring through ITS and which ITS participant has collect the fee from its members. Nasdaq believes that the proposed arrangement is a fair and efficient means for passing fees collected at one ITS participant exchange based upon executions of covered sales occurring at another ITS participant exchange. Nasdaq acknowledges that the legal duty to report and pay the Section 31 fee remains with the ITS participant on which the sale was in fact transacted. 2. Statutory Basis Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act, 11 in general, and with Sections 6(b)(4) 12 and 6(b)(5) 13 of the Act, in particular, in that the proposal provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among Nasdaq's members and issuers and other persons using its facilities, and is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove the impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. This proposal will allow Nasdaq to participant in the process established by other SROs to pass fees they have collected from members for transactions executed on another SRO through ITS. 11 15 U.S.C. 78f. 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 13 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 No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. 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-NASDAQ-2006-010 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 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-010. 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 Nasdaq. 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-NASDAQ-2006-010 and should be submitted on or before June 15, 2006. IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 14 In particular, the Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 15 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. National securities exchanges obtain funds to pay their Section 31 fees to the Commission by charging fees to broker-dealers who generate the covered sales on which Section 31 fees are based. An exchange can obtain most of these funds by imposing a fee on one of its members whenever the member is on the sell side of a transaction. However, when the exchange accepts an ITS commitment to buy, the ultimate seller is a party on another market. The exchange lacks the ability to pass a fee to that seller directly, because the seller may not be a member of the exchange. Under the proposed arrangement, which has been adopted by each of the ITS participant exchanges other than NASD, 16 the exchange that routed the ITS commitment away will continue to collect a fee from the broker-dealer that placed the sell order. Then, with respect to each ITS participant exchange, the exchange will determine whether it is a net sender or net receiver of ITS trades and send fees to or accept fees from each other exchange accordingly. The Commission believes this is an equitable manner for the exchanges to obtain funds to pay their Section 31 fees on covered sales resulting from ITS trades. 14 In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered its impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 16 *See* letter from George W. Mann, Jr., Executive Vice President and General Counsel, BSE, and Chairman, Subcommittee, to Michael Gaw, Assistant Director, Division, Commission, dated September 29, 2005. Under Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 17 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 prior to the thirtieth day after publishing notice of filing thereof in the **Federal Register** . In this case, the Commission does not believe a comment period is necessary because all of the parties affected by the proposed fee—the other ITS participant exchanges—have already adopted the same fee arrangement. 18 17 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 18 *See supra* note 16. For the reasons set forth above, the Commission finds good cause to accelerate approval of the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act. V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the proposed rule change (SR-NASDAQ-2006-010) is hereby approved on an accelerated basis. 19 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 19 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-7990 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53838; File No. SR-NASD-2006-059] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Related to Non-NASD Member Broker/Dealer Access to Nasdaq's Brut and INET Facilities May 18, 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 May 1, 2006, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”), through its subsidiary, the Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (“Nasdaq”), 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 Nasdaq. On May 16, 2006, Nasdaq submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 Nasdaq filed the proposed rule change, as amended, as a “non-controversial” rule change under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act, 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, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange clarified in the purpose section the number of non-member broker-dealers with access to the Brut and INET systems. In addition, Nasdaq requested waivers of the 5-day notice and 30-day pre-operative delay contained in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act. 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Nasdaq proposes to continue the participation of broker-dealers that are non-NASD members in Nasdaq's Brut and INET systems through the earlier of July 1, 2006, or the date Nasdaq becomes operational as a national securities exchange for the particular types of securities traded by those non-members in Nasdaq's INET and Brut systems. Nasdaq would implement the proposed rule change immediately. The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new language is in *italics* . Proposed deletions are in [brackets]. 4901. Definitions

(a)through

(h)No change.

(i)The term “Participant” shall mean an NASD member that fulfills the obligations contained in Rule 4902 regarding participation in the System. [Until May 1, 2006] [t] *T* he term “Participant” shall also include non-NASD broker/dealers that desire to use the System and otherwise meet all other requirements for System participation. *Non-NASD member broker/dealers shall have access to System until the earlier of either July 1, 2006, or the date that Nasdaq becomes operational as a national securities exchange for the particular class of securities traded by the non-NASD member.*

(j)through

(w)No Change 4952. System Participant Registration

(a)Participation in INET requires current registration with the System and is conditioned upon the Participant's initial and continuing compliance with the following requirements: (1)-(5) No Change.

(6)In addition to the above, [on or before May 1, 2006,] all System Participants shall be members of the Association. *Exception: Non-NASD member broker/dealers shall have access to System until the earlier of either July 1, 2006, or the date that Nasdaq becomes operational as a national securities exchange for the particular class of securities traded by the non-NASD member.* 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 IV below. Nasdaq 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, Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Nasdaq states that, under current rules, broker-dealers that are not members of the NASD may use the Brut and INET systems until May 1, 2006. Nasdaq is proposing to modify this provision so as to allow non-NASD member broker-dealers to use the Brut and INET systems until the earlier of either July 1, 2006, or the date that Nasdaq becomes operational as a national securities exchange for the particular class of securities traded by the non-member. Nasdaq believes that this division of dates upon which non-NASD members must be members of the Nasdaq exchange in order to continue to use Nasdaq's trading facilities is necessary because Nasdaq plans to become operational as an exchange in two phases with the first involving only Nasdaq securities, with a second later phase for securities listed by other exchanges. Under the proposal, non-NASD members trading Nasdaq-listed securities would be required to be a Nasdaq exchange member to continue to trade Nasdaq securities in Brut and INET on the date that Nasdaq becomes operational as exchange for Nasdaq issues, while entities trading other exchange-listed securities would be allowed continued access to the Brut and INET systems for that trading until such time as Nasdaq becomes operational as an exchange for non-Nasdaq issues. Nasdaq states that in neither scenario would non-NASD member access to the Brut and INET systems extend beyond July 1, 2006 without a further Commission-approved extension. Nasdaq states that this extension is intended to allow these non-NASD member broker-dealers to have continued access to Brut and INET while they take actions to become members of the recently-approved Nasdaq exchange. Nasdaq notes that only 44 non-NASD member broker dealers currently have access to its Brut and INET systems (4 in the Brut system and 40 in the INET system) and, as before, Nasdaq commits not to allow any additional non-NASD broker-dealers access during this extension period. 5 5 See Amendment No. 1, *supra* note 3. 2. Statutory Basis Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A of the Act, 6 in general, and with Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act, 7 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and to remove impediments to a free and open market and a national market system. 6 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3. 7 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change, as amended, will result in 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 Nasdaq states that written comments were neither solicited nor received with respect to the proposed rule change, as amended. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the proposed rule change, as amended, does not:

(i)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;

(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)become operative for 30 days after the date of 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, as amended, has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 8 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder. 9 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 10 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 11 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Nasdaq has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-operative delay and the five-day pre-filing notice requirement and designate the proposed rule change, as amended, to become effective upon filing. Nasdaq believes that waivers of such periods will allow continued uninterrupted access to the Brut and INET systems for non-NASD broker dealers in the period of time immediately preceding Nasdaq's operation as an exchange. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day pre-operative delay and the five-day pre-filing notice requirement is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because it would facilitate the orderly transition of Nasdaq to a national securities exchange, thus removing impediments to a free and open market and a national market system. For the reasons stated above, the Commission designates the proposal, as amended, to become effective and operative on May 1, 2006. 12 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 11 *Id* . 12 For purposes only of accelerating the operative date of this proposal, the Commission has considered the impact of the proposed rule on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such 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 the furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 13 13 The effective date of the original proposed rule change is May 1, 2006, and the effective date of Amendment No. 1 is May 16, 2006. For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposal, the Commission considers the period to commence on May 16, 2006, the date on which the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-NASD-2006-059 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 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-059. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of Nasdaq. 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-NASD-2006-059 and should be submitted on or before June 15, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-7996 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53826; File No. SR-NYSE-2005-90] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 To Allow Certain Institutional Customers To Elect Not To Receive Account Statements May 18, 2006. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 3 notice is hereby given that on December 21, 2005, the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (“NYSE” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or the “Commission”) the proposed change to NYSE Rule 409 (Statements of Accounts to Customers) as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. On March 28, 2006, the NYSE filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 4 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 15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* 3 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 4 In Amendment No. 1, a partial amendment, the NYSE proposed additional changes to the text of proposed amended Rule 409, which are incorporated in the proposed rule text below. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange is proposing to amend NYSE Rule 409 to allow institutional customers conducting a Delivery versus Payment and Receive versus Payment (“DVP/RVP”) business to elect not to receive account statements. The text of the proposed rule change is set forth below. *Italics* indicate new text that would be added to the current text of NYSE Rule 409. Rule 409. Statements of Accounts to Customers

(a)Except with the permission of the Exchange, *or as otherwise provided by this paragraph,* member organizations shall send to their customers statements of account showing security and money positions and entries at least quarterly to all accounts having an entry, money or security position during the preceding quarter. *Quarterly statements need not be sent to a customer pursuant to Rule 409(a) if:* *(1) The customer's account is carried solely for the purpose of execution on a Delivery versus Payment/Receive versus Payment basis (DVP/RVP);* *(2) All transactions effected for the account are done on a DVP/RVP basis in conformity with Rule 387;* *(3) The account does not show security or money positions at the end of the quarter;* *(4) The customer consents to the suspension of such statements in writing. Such consents must be maintained by the member organization in a manner consistent with Exchange Rule 440 and Rule 17a-4 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;* *(5) The member organization undertakes to provide any particular statement or statements to the customer promptly upon request; and* *(6) The member organization undertakes to promptly reinstate the delivery of such statements to the customer upon request.* *Nothing in this rule shall be seen to qualify or condition the obligations of a member organization under SEC Rule 15c3-2 concerning quarterly notices of free credit balances on statements.* *For purposes of this rule, a DVP/RVP account is an arrangement whereby payment for securities purchased is to be made to the selling customer's agent and/or delivery of securities sold is to be made to the buying customer's agent in exchange for payment at time of settlement, usually in the form of cash.*

(b)through (g)—No change. Supplementary Material—No change. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In filing the proposed rule change and Amendment No. 1 with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change, as amended. 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 Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

(1)Purpose *Waiving of Customer Statements for Institutional DVP/RVP Accounts.* NYSE Rule 409, in pertinent part, specifies the obligations of member organizations with respect to customer statements, including frequency of delivery and elements of content. NYSE Rule 409(a) requires that, except with the permission of the Exchange, members and member organizations shall send statements at least quarterly to customers for accounts showing security and money positions and entries during the preceding quarter. The Exchange proposes amendments to the Rule that would provide relief from this requirement for customer accounts that are carried solely for the purpose of DVP/RVP transactions. A DVP/RVP account is an arrangement whereby delivery of securities sold is made to the buying customer's bank in exchange for payment, usually in cash, at settlement. Such accounts must comply with the requirements outlined in NYSE Rule 387 (COD Orders). 5 5 NYSE Rule 387 sets out specific prerequisites for the acceptance of such orders:

(1)The member or member organization must have previously received the name and address of the agent, together with its customer number;

(2)The order must note the payment on delivery or collect on delivery nature of the trade;

(3)The member or member organization must deliver to the customer a confirmation in the specified form; and

(4)The member organization must have obtained an agreement from the customer regarding the furnishing of appropriate instructions for the settlement of the trade. Due to the nature of DVP/RVP accounts, their statements do not generally reflect any cash balance or security position at the end of a quarter. Consequently, DVP/RVP customers (chiefly institutional customers) generally rely on confirmations (issued pursuant to SEC Rule 10b-10) or trade runs for transaction-related information. Such records provide critical transactional information (such as security name and price, commission or markup, trade date, settlement date, etc.) in a timely fashion (trade date +1). According to the NYSE, such records are preferred by institutional investors, who have no desire to receive voluminous quarterly statements. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes amendments to Rule 409 that would relieve member organizations of the obligation to send quarterly statements to customers with such accounts if:

(1)The customer's account is carried solely for the purpose of execution on a DVP/RVP basis;

(2)all transactions effected for the account are done on a DVP/RVP basis in conformity with Rule 387;

(3)the account does not show security or money positions at the end of the quarter;

(4)the customer consents to the suspension of such statements in writing and such consents are maintained by the member organization in a manner consistent with Exchange Rule 440 and Rule 17a-4 under the Exchange Act;

(5)the member organization undertakes to provide any particular statement or statements to the customer promptly upon request; and

(6)the member organization undertakes to promptly reinstate the delivery of such statements to the customer upon request. Nothing in the proposed amended rule would be seen to qualify or condition the obligations of a member organization under SEC Rule 15c3-2 concerning quarterly notices of free credit balances on statements. For purposes of the proposed amended rule, a DVP/RVP account is an arrangement whereby payment for securities purchased is to be made to the selling customer's agent and/or delivery of securities sold is to be made to the buying customer's agent in exchange for payment at time of settlement, usually in the form of cash. By requiring affirmative consent, the ability of the customer to receive quarterly statements is preserved, and the member organization is precluded from unilaterally terminating delivery of such statements. The customer would also retain the right to reinstate the delivery of statements at any time, and to resume receipt of statements promptly upon request. In sum, the Exchange believes that the proposed amended rule would provide reasonable regulatory flexibility by allowing customers to decline delivery of statements that are of little or no use to them. Correspondingly, the proposed amended rule would result in substantial cost savings to member organizations in that they would no longer be required to produce and deliver unwanted and unnecessary records. 6 6 In correspondence dated October 26, 2004, and May 22, 2003, that the NYSE received from Mr. Lawrence Morillo, Chairman of the Securities Industry Association STP Legal and Regulatory Subcommittee, it was estimated that it would not be unreasonable to expect a firm to realize savings of $100,000 per year in statement production and mailing costs.

(2)Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange, and in particular, with the requirements of section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act. 7 Section 6(b)(5) requires, among other things, that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and national market system, and in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, perfect the mechanism of a free an open market, and protect investors by permitting DVP/RVP customers to avoid receiving unwanted, voluminous quarterly account statements. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others The Exchange neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period

(i)as the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or

(ii)as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:

(a)By order approve such proposed rule change, or

(b)Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Exchange 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-2005-90 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 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2005-90. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the 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-2005-90 and should be submitted on or before June 15, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 8 8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-8053 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-53831; File No. SR-Phlx-2006-26] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Regulatory Services Agreements May 18, 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 April 28, 2006, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Exchange” or “Phlx”) 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 Exchange filed the proposed rule change as a “non-controversial” rule change under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act, 3 which rendered 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 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to adopt a rule concerning regulatory services agreements (“RSAs”), in which the Exchange would contract with another self-regulatory organization (“SRO”) for the performance of certain of the Exchange's regulatory functions. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Phlx's Web site, * http://www.phlx.com,* at the Phlx's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference 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 the proposed rule change is to enhance the Phlx's ability to carry out its regulatory obligations under the Act by clarifying the Phlx's ability to contract with another SRO for regulatory services. Under any RSA with another SRO, the Phlx would remain an SRO registered under Section 6 of the Act 4 and therefore would continue to have statutory authority and responsibility for enforcing compliance by its members, and persons associated with its members, with the Act, the rules thereunder, and the rules of the Exchange. 4 15 U.S.C. 78f. This rule change would have immediate applicability with respect to an RSA between the Phlx, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE”), and other options markets participating in the proposed Options Regulatory Surveillance Authority national market system plan (“ORSA”). The Phlx has determined that to best discharge its SRO responsibilities, it will contract with CBOE, which is subject to Commission oversight pursuant to Sections 6 and 19 of the Act, 5 for CBOE to provide certain regulatory services to the Phlx, as set forth in the ORSA RSA. In performing services under the ORSA RSA, CBOE will be operating pursuant to the statutory SRO responsibilities of the Phlx under Sections 6 and 19, as well as performing for itself its own SRO responsibilities. The proposed rule change specifically states that any action taken by another SRO, or its employees or authorized agents, operating on behalf of the Phlx pursuant to an RSA with the Exchange ( *e.g.* , CBOE under the ORSA RSA) will be deemed an action taken by the Exchange. The Phlx will retain ultimate responsibility for performance of its SRO duties under the RSA, and the proposed rule change states that the Exchange shall retain ultimate legal responsibility for and control of its SRO responsibilities. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f and 15 U.S.C. 78s. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 6 in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections 6(b)(1), 6(b)(6) and 6(b)(7) of the Act 7 in particular, in that it will enhance the ability of the Exchange to enforce compliance by its members and persons associated with its members with the provisions of the Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the Exchange; it will help ensure that members and persons associated with members are appropriately disciplined for violations of the Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the Exchange; and it will provide a fair procedure for the disciplining of members and persons associated with members. 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1); 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(6); and 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(7). 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 written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the proposed rule change:

(i)Does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;

(ii)does not impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)by its terms, does not become operative for 30 days after the date of 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 8 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder. 9 The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay period for “non-controversial” proposals and make the proposed rule change effective and operative upon filing. The Commission hereby grants the request. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. In this regard, the Commission believes that the proposal should be implemented without delay because of its immediate applicability with respect to the RSA among the Phlx, CBOE and the other ORSA participants. 10 For this reason, the Commission designates the proposal to be effective and operative upon filing with the Commission. 11 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 10 The Commission notes that the proposed rule change is based on a similar rule of the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. * See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53436 (March 7, 2006), 71 FR 13194 (March 14, 2006) (SR-BSE-2006-08). 11 For the purposes only of accelerating the operative date of this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such 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 the furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2006-26 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 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2006-26. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2006-26 and should be submitted on or before June 15, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-7997 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5419] Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs

(ECA)Request for Grant Proposals: EducationUSA Advising Program for Students and Scholars from the Middle East and North Africa *Announcement Type:* Cooperative Agreement. *Funding Opportunity Number:* ECA/A/S/A-07-09. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:* 00.000. *Key Dates:* *Application Deadline:* August 18, 2006. *Executive Summary:* The Educational Information and Resources Branch (ECA/A/S/A), Office of Global Educational Programs, of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, announces an open competition to administer EducationUSA advising centers in the Middle East and North Africa. Public and private non-profit U.S. organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3) may submit proposals to offer overseas educational advising, orientation, and information services for international students and scholars in one or more of twelve locations in the Middle East and North Africa. Organizations wishing to apply for this cooperative agreement must either currently have offices in the countries covered by this agreement, or include a detailed plan in their proposal for establishing such a presence by January 1, 2007, when advising activities must begin. Maximum expected award level is $600,000, pending availability of funds. Start-up costs related to opening new advising centers (fees, purchase of equipment, etc.) must be borne by the applicant, and may not be included in the budget submission of this proposal. Applicants are encouraged to keep headquarters costs as low as possible and ensure that maximum funding flows to field offices. Please see POGI for details. I. Funding Opportunity Description *Authority:* Overall grant making authority for this program is contained in the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, Public Law 87-256, as amended, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the Act is “to enable the Government of the United States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries * * *; to strengthen the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of the people of the United States and other nations * * * and thus to assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic and peaceful relations between the United States and the other countries of the world.” The funding authority for the program above is provided through legislation. *Purpose:* Department of State-affiliated EducationUSA advising centers operate in nearly 450 locations in 170 countries around the world. Advisors guide foreign students in their pursuit of educational opportunities in the United States and prepare them for direct exposure to American values, ideas, models, and traditions. They provide accurate, unbiased information on the full range of accredited U.S. higher educational institutions and work to build mutual understanding between the United States and other countries through educational exchange. In the Middle East and North Africa, funding will support foreign student advising for U.S. study only (not for study in third countries) in Egypt (Alexandria and Cairo), Gaza, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Syria, Tunisia, West Bank, and Yemen. Organizations may apply to operate centers in one or more of the listed locations, up to the total of twelve. The advising centers will offer group informational and individual advising sessions for foreign students, and conduct frequent outreach to local in-country institutions. The advising centers will provide information on the following topics: The U.S. education system; U.S. colleges, universities, community colleges and other higher education institutions; accreditation; the application process to a U.S. university; majors and fields of study; testing requirements; life in the U.S.; scholarship programs and financial aid; and visa procedures. Centers will provide pre-departure orientation sessions and also try to stay in touch with students once they are in the United States, and after they return from their U.S. experience, as they will be an excellent source of expertise for new advisees. Free introductory group advising sessions and free access to the library (at least 50% of the time) must be provided, but applicants may charge modest, affordable fees to students for other services, or devise a membership package to recover some advising costs. Applicants may also charge reasonable fees if services are provided to help U.S. university representatives traveling in the region for recruitment purposes. See POGI for details. Group advising and outreach sessions should pay particular attention to reaching out to underserved populations, to addressing student and parent safety concerns, and to correcting misperceptions regarding the U.S. visa process. Outreach efforts should be coordinated with Public Affairs and Consular sections at U.S. Embassies. Advising centers will provide regular access, at times convenient to the public, to the reference library and computers with Internet to allow students to conduct online research related to study in the U.S. The library will contain, at a minimum, materials provided by ECA through its annual online book ordering process; it may also have catalogues and other materials sent by accredited U.S. colleges or other recognized educational sources. A list of ECA materials may be obtained by contacting Program Officer Rachel Waldstein, *waldsteinre@state.gov.* Security and public access should be taken into consideration in terms of advising center location; EducationUSA offices should be centrally located and near public transportation whenever possible. The grantee organization will employ the advisors and handle all personnel benefits and other human resource issues. Advisors will be eligible to participate in Department of State-sponsored training opportunities, to order reference materials from the Department of State, and to receive guidance and assistance from the Department of State's Regional Educational Advising Coordinator

(REAC)based in Rabat, Morocco. The REAC's job is to conduct site visits to evaluate advising centers and local country conditions as they relate to educational advising, share information with all advisors through a listserv and newsletter, provide training through regional and local workshops, and recommend new advisors for ECA training programs. The EducationUSA advising office serves as the U.S. Embassy's in-country resource on U.S. higher education. Therefore, applicants should describe their abilities to monitor, to the extent possible, the status of the education systems in each of the countries and report important issues to ECA/A/S/A and the U.S. Embassies. Organizations should develop a network of contacts within the Ministries of Education, local schools, universities and other appropriate institutions. II. Award Information *Type of Award:* Cooperative Agreement. In a cooperative agreement, ECA/A/S/A is substantially involved in program activities above and beyond routine grant monitoring. ECA/A/S/A activities and responsibilities for this program are as follows: Approve staffing requirements including level of effort and distribution of responsibilities among advising staff; select advisors for training and conference attendance; and designate program priorities such as outreach to underserved populations, and others as needed. Public Affairs and Consular officials at U.S. Embassies should be notified of all in-country outreach activities, to maximize synergies to be achieved by dual efforts. *Fiscal Year Funds:* 2007 (pending availability). *Approximate Total Funding:* Minimum of $450,000 and, pending availability of funds, up to $600,000. *Approximate Number of Awards:* One or more. *Anticipated Award Date:* Pending availability of funds, January 1, 2007. *Anticipated Project Completion Date:* December 31, 2007. *Additional Information:* Pending successful implementation of this program and the availability of funds in subsequent fiscal years, it is ECA's intent to renew this grant for two additional fiscal years, before openly competing it again. Applicants must submit a comprehensive budget with a summary budget as well as detailed administrative and program budgets. Organizations may apply to provide advising services in one or more of the above-listed countries. Educational advising services must be provided on a regularly scheduled basis, open to the public for group and individual use at least 30 hours per week, with free access to library and computer at least 50% of those hours. Additional hours may be reserved for program development, administrative work, and communications. If applying for more than one site, applicants should provide separate budgets and identify proposed program components and activities for each location. Proposals with overhead and indirect costs exceeding 35% of the amount requested will be deemed less competitive. III. Eligibility Information III.1. *Eligible applicants:* Applications may be submitted by public and private U.S. non-profit organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3). III.2. *Cost Sharing or Matching Funds:* There is no minimum or maximum percentage required for this competition. However, the Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs. When cost sharing is offered, it is understood and agreed that the applicant must provide the amount of cost sharing as stipulated in its proposal and later included in an approved grant agreement. Cost sharing may be in the form of allowable direct or indirect costs. For accountability, you must maintain written records to support all costs which are claimed as your contribution, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal Government. Such records are subject to audit. The basis for determining the value of cash and in-kind contributions must be in accordance with OMB Circular A-110, (Revised), Subpart C.23—Cost Sharing and Matching. In the event you do not provide the minimum amount of cost sharing as stipulated in the approved budget, ECA's contribution will be reduced in like proportion. Overhead and indirect costs should not exceed 35% of the amount requested. III.3. *Other Eligibility Requirements:* Grants awarded to eligible organizations with less than four years of experience in conducting international exchange programs will be limited to $60,000. IV. Application and Submission Information Note: Please read the complete **Federal Register** announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. IV.1. *Contact Information to Request an Application Package:* Please contact the Educational Information and Resources Branch of the Office of Global Educational Programs, ECA/A/S/A, room 349, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, tel: 202-453-8866. fax: 202-453-8890, e-mail: *Waldsteinre@state.gov* to request a Solicitation Package. Please refer to the Funding Opportunity Number ECA/A/S/A-07-09 located at the top of this announcement when making your request. The Solicitation Package contains the Proposal Submission Instruction

(PSI)document which consists of required application forms, and standard guidelines for proposal preparation. It also contains the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation

(POGI)document, which provides specific information, award criteria and budget instructions tailored to this competition. Please specify Program Officer Rachel Waldstein and refer to the Funding Opportunity Number ECA/A/S/A-07-09 located at the top of this announcement on all other inquiries and correspondence. IV.2. *To Download a Solicitation Package Via Internet:* The entire Solicitation Package may be downloaded from the Bureau's Web site at *http://exchanges.state.gov/education/rfgps/menu.htm.* Please read all information before downloading. IV.3. *Content and Form of Submission:* Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. The application should be sent per the instructions under IV.3f. “Application Deadline and Methods of Submission” below. IV.3a. You are required to have a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System

(DUNS)number to apply for a grant or cooperative agreement from the U.S. Government. This number is a nine-digit identification number, which uniquely identifies business entities. Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. To obtain a DUNS number, access *http://www.dunandbradstreet.com* or call 1-866-705-5711. Please ensure that your DUNS number is included in the appropriate box of the SF-424 which is part of the formal application package. IV.3b. All proposals must contain an executive summary, proposal narrative and budget. Please Refer to the Solicitation Package. It contains the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions

(PSI)document and the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation

(POGI)document for additional formatting and technical requirements. IV.3c. You must have nonprofit status with the IRS at the time of application. If your organization is a private nonprofit which has not received a grant or cooperative agreement from ECA in the past three years, or if your organization received nonprofit status from the IRS within the past four years, you must submit the necessary documentation to verify nonprofit status as directed in the PSI document. Failure to do so will cause your proposal to be declared technically ineligible. IV.3d. Please take into consideration the following information when preparing your proposal narrative: IV.3d.1. *Adherence to All Regulations Governing the J Visa:* For your information only, the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs is placing renewed emphasis on the secure and proper administration of Exchange Visitor (J visa) Programs and adherence by grantees and sponsors to all regulations governing the J visa. Therefore, proposals should demonstrate the applicant's capacity to meet all requirements governing the administration of the Exchange Visitor Programs as set forth in 22 CFR part 62, including the oversight of Responsible Officers and Alternate Responsible Officers, screening and selection of program participants, provision of pre-arrival information and orientation to participants, monitoring of participants, proper maintenance and security of forms, recordkeeping, reporting and other requirements. The Grantee will be responsible for issuing DS-2019 forms to participants in this program. A copy of the complete regulations governing the administration of Exchange Visitor

(J)programs is available at *http://exchanges.state.gov* or from: United States Department of State, Office of Exchange Coordination and Designation, ECA/EC/ECD—SA-44, Room 734, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547. Telephone:

(202)203-5029. FAX:

(202)453-8640. Please refer to Solicitation Package for further information. IV.3d.2. *Diversity, Freedom and Democracy Guidelines:* Pursuant to the Bureau's authorizing legislation, programs must maintain a non-political character and should be balanced and representative of the diversity of American political, social, and cultural life. “Diversity” should be interpreted in the broadest sense and encompass differences including, but not limited to ethnicity, race, gender, religion, geographic location, socio-economic status, and physical challenges. Applicants are strongly encouraged to adhere to the advancement of this principle both in program administration and in program content. Please refer to the review criteria under the “Support for Diversity” section for specific suggestions on incorporating diversity into your proposal. Public Law 104-319 provides that “in carrying out programs of educational and cultural exchange in countries whose people do not fully enjoy freedom and democracy,” the Bureau “shall take appropriate steps to provide opportunities for participation in such programs to human rights and democracy leaders of such countries.” Public Law 106-113 requires that the governments of the countries described above do not have inappropriate influence in the selection process. Proposals should reflect advancement of these goals in their program contents, to the full extent deemed feasible. IV.3d.3. *Program Monitoring and Evaluation:* Proposals must include a plan to monitor and evaluate the project's success, both as the activities unfold and at the end of the program. The Bureau recommends that your proposal include a draft survey questionnaire or other technique plus a description of a methodology to use to link outcomes to original project objectives. The Bureau expects that the grantee will track participants or partners and be able to respond to key evaluation questions, including satisfaction with the program, learning as a result of the program, changes in behavior as a result of the program, and effects of the program on institutions (institutions in which participants work or partner institutions). The evaluation plan should include indicators that measure gains in mutual understanding as well as substantive knowledge. Successful monitoring and evaluation depend heavily on setting clear goals and outcomes at the outset of a program. Your evaluation plan should include a description of your project's objectives, your anticipated project outcomes, and how and when you intend to measure these outcomes (performance indicators). The more that outcomes are “smart” (specific, measurable, attainable, results-oriented, and placed in a reasonable time frame), the easier it will be to conduct the evaluation. You should also show how your project objectives link to the goals of the program described in this RFGP. Your monitoring and evaluation plan should clearly distinguish between program *outputs* and *outcomes. Outputs* are products and services delivered, often stated as an amount. Output information is important to show the scope or size of project activities, but it cannot substitute for information about progress towards outcomes or the results achieved. Examples of outputs include the number of people trained or the number of seminars conducted. *Outcomes,* in contrast, represent specific results a project is intended to achieve and is usually measured as an extent of change. Findings on outputs and outcomes should both be reported, but the focus should be on outcomes. We encourage you to assess the following four levels of outcomes, as they relate to the program goals set out in the RFGP (listed here in increasing order of importance): 1. Participant satisfaction with the program and exchange experience. 2. Participant learning, such as increased knowledge, aptitude, skills, and changed understanding and attitude. Learning includes both substantive (subject-specific) learning and mutual understanding. 3. Participant behavior, concrete actions to apply knowledge in work or community; greater participation and responsibility in civic organizations; interpretation and explanation of experiences and new knowledge gained; continued contacts between participants, community members, and others. 4. Institutional changes, such as increased collaboration and partnerships, policy reforms, new programming, and organizational improvements. Please note: Consideration should be given to the appropriate timing of data collection for each level of outcome. For example, satisfaction is usually captured as a short-term outcome, whereas behavior and institutional changes are normally considered longer-term outcomes. Overall, the quality of your monitoring and evaluation plan will be judged on how well it

(1)specifies intended outcomes;

(2)gives clear descriptions of how each outcome will be measured;

(3)identifies when particular outcomes will be measured; and

(4)provides a clear description of the data collection strategies for each outcome ( *i.e.* , surveys, interviews, or focus groups). (Please note that evaluation plans that deal only with the first level of outcomes [satisfaction] will be deemed less competitive under the present evaluation criteria.) Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. Please describe your plans for: Provision of services affordable to students, financial sustainability of centers, use of EducationUSA advising-related program income to fund further advising activities, overall program management, coordination of activities with ECA as well as Public Affairs and Consular Sections at U.S. Embassies, staffing to provide an adequate level of service, and avoiding overlap with support for other ECA programs if applicable. (Applicants that have received other ECA grants on which proposed staff also work should specify programs and amount of staff time devoted to them.) IV.3e. Please take the following information into consideration when preparing your budget: IV.3e.1. Applicants must submit a comprehensive budget for the entire program for each country in which they propose to operate. There must be a summary budget as well as breakdowns reflecting both administrative and program budgets. Applicants may provide separate sub-budgets for each program component, phase, location, or activity to provide clarification. The most competitive proposals will have overhead and indirect costs which do not exceed 35% of the total funding requested. IV.3e.2. Allowable costs for the program include the following: A. Program Costs

(1)Advisers' salaries and benefits;

(2)Office supplies and expenses, including rent, utilities, communications, postage, shipping; publicity, materials and travel for outreach activities. B. Indirect Costs Please refer to the Solicitation Package for complete budget guidelines and formatting instructions. IV.3f. *Submission Dates and Times:* *Reference Number:* ECA/A/S/A-07-09. *Application Deadline Date:* Friday, August 18, 2006. *Methods of Submission:* Applications may be submitted in one of two ways:

(1)In hard-copy, via a nationally recognized overnight delivery service ( *i.e.* , DHL, Federal Express, UPS, Airborne Express, or U.S. Postal Service Express Overnight Mail, etc.), or

(2)Electronically through *http://www.grants.gov.* Along with the Project Title, all applicants must enter the above Reference Number in Box 11 on the SF-424 contained in the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions

(PSI)of the solicitation document. IV.3f.1. *Submitting Printed Applications.* Applications must be shipped no later than the above deadline. Delivery services used by applicants must have in-place, centralized shipping identification and tracking systems that may be accessed via the Internet and delivery people who are identifiable by commonly recognized uniforms and delivery vehicles. Proposals shipped on or before the above deadline but received at ECA more than seven days after the deadline will be ineligible for further consideration under this competition. Proposals shipped after the established deadlines are ineligible for consideration under this competition. ECA will not notify you upon receipt of application. It is each applicant's responsibility to ensure that each package is marked with a legible tracking number and to monitor/confirm delivery to ECA via the Internet. Delivery of proposal packages may not be made via local courier service or in person for this competition. Faxed documents will not be accepted at any time. Only proposals submitted as stated above will be considered. Important note: When preparing your submission please make sure to include one extra copy of the completed SF-424 form and place it in an envelope addressed to “ECA/EX/PM”. Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. The original and eight copies of the application should be sent to: U.S. Department of State, SA-44, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Ref.: ECA/A/S/A-07-09, Program Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 534, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547. IV.3f.2. *Submitting Electronic Applications:* Applicants have the option of submitting proposals electronically through Grants.gov ( *http://www.grants.gov* ). Complete solicitation packages are available at Grants.gov in the “Find” portion of the system. Please follow the instructions available in the “Get Started” portion of the site ( *http://www.grants.gov/GetStarted* ). Applicants have until midnight (12 a.m.) of the closing date to ensure that their entire applications have been uploaded to the grants.gov site. Applications uploaded to the site after midnight of the application deadline date will be automatically rejected by the grants.gov system, and will be technically ineligible. Applicants will receive a confirmation e-mail from grants.gov upon the successful submission of an application. ECA will not notify you upon receipt of electronic applications. IV.3g. *Intergovernmental Review of Applications:* Executive Order 12372 does not apply to this program. Applicants must also submit the “Executive Summary” and “Proposal Narrative” sections of the proposal in text (.txt) format on a PC-formatted disk. The Bureau will provide these files electronically to the appropriate Public Affairs Section(s) at the U.S. embassy(ies) for its(their) review. V. Application Review Information V.1. Review Process The Bureau will review all proposals for technical eligibility. Proposals will be deemed ineligible if they do not fully adhere to the guidelines stated herein and in the Solicitation Package. All eligible proposals will be reviewed by the program office, as well as the Public Diplomacy section overseas, where appropriate. Eligible proposals will be subject to compliance with Federal and Bureau regulations and guidelines and forwarded to Bureau grant panels for advisory review. Proposals may also be reviewed by the Office of the Legal Adviser or by other Department elements. Final funding decisions are at the discretion of the Department of State's Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final technical authority for assistance awards (cooperative agreements) resides with the Bureau's Grants Officer. Review Criteria Technically eligible applications will be competitively reviewed according to the criteria stated below. These criteria are not rank ordered and all carry equal weight in the proposal evaluation. Please see POGI for description of each criterion. 1. Quality of the program idea. 2. Program planning/ability to achieve program objectives. 3. Institutional capacity/record. 4. Area expertise. 5. Multiplier effect/impact. 6. Support of diversity. 7. Cost effectiveness/cost sharing. 8. Project evaluation. VI. Award Administration Information VI.1. *Award Notices:* Final awards cannot be made until funds have been appropriated by Congress, allocated and committed through internal Bureau procedures. Successful applicants will receive an Assistance Award Document

(AAD)from the Bureau's Grants Office. The AAD and the original grant proposal with subsequent modifications (if applicable) shall be the only binding authorizing document between the recipient and the U.S. Government. The AAD will be signed by an authorized Grants Officer, and mailed to the recipient's responsible officer identified in the application. Unsuccessful applicants will receive notification of the results of the application review from the ECA program office coordinating this competition. VI.2. *Administrative and National Policy Requirements:* Terms and Conditions for the Administration of ECA agreements include the following: Office of Management and Budget Circular A-122, “Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations.” Office of Management and Budget Circular A-21, “Cost Principles for Educational Institutions.” OMB Circular A-87, “Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Governments.” OMB Circular No. A-110 (Revised), “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Nonprofit Organizations.” OMB Circular No. A-102, “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants-in-Aid to State and Local Governments.” OMB Circular No. A-133, “Audits of States, Local Government, and Non-profit Organizations.” Please reference the following Web sites for additional information: *http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants.* *http://exchanges.state.gov/education/grantsdiv/terms.htm#articleI.* VI.3. *Reporting Requirements:* You must provide ECA with a hard copy original plus one copy and electronic version of the following reports:

(1)A final program and financial report no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award; financial report must include program income from all advising activities (see POGI for description of applicable services).

(2)Quarterly program and financial reports which should include discussion of advising activities at each center, challenges encountered and efforts to overcome them, and an accounting of EducationUSA-related program income as mentioned above. Grantees will be required to provide analysis of their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. (Please refer to IV. Application and Submission Instructions (IV.3.d.3) above for Program Monitoring and Evaluation information.) All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. All reports must be sent to the ECA Grants Officer and ECA Program Officer listed in the final assistance award document. Optional—VI.4. Program Data Requirements: Organizations awarded grants will be required to maintain specific data on program participants and activities in an electronically accessible database format that can be shared with the Bureau as required. As a minimum, the data must include the following:

(1)Name, address, contact information and biographic sketch of all persons who travel internationally on funds provided by the grant or who benefit from grant funding but do not travel.

(2)Monthly statistics of advising center usage, to be sent by e-mail directly to the REAC. VII. Agency Contacts For questions about this announcement, contact: Rachel Waldstein, Program Officer, Educational Information and Resources Branch, ECA/A/S/A, Room 349, ECA/A/S/A-07-09, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, telephone 202-453-8866, fax 202-453-8890, *Waldsteinre@state.gov.* All correspondence with the Bureau concerning this RFGP should reference the above title and number ECA/A/S/A-07-09. Please read the complete **Federal Register** announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. VIII. Other Information *Notice:* The terms and conditions published in this RFGP are binding and may not be modified by any Bureau representative. Explanatory information provided by the Bureau that contradicts published language will not be binding. Issuance of the RFGP does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government. The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and the availability of funds. Awards made will be subject to periodic reporting and evaluation requirements per section VI.3 above. Dated: May 16, 2006. Dina Habib Powell, Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E6-8065 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary Aviation Proceedings, Agreements Filed the Week Ending May 5, 2006 The following Agreements were filed with the Department of Transportation under the sections 412 and 414 of the Federal Aviation Act, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1382 and 1384) and procedures governing proceedings to enforce these provisions. Answers may be filed within 21 days after the filing of the application. *Docket Number:* OST-2006-24688. *Date Filed:* May 1, 2006. *Parties:* Members of the International Air Transport Association. *Subject:* Mail Vote 488—Resolution 010o, TC3 Within South East Asia, Special Passenger Amending Resolution from Chinese Taipei to South East Asia. Intended effective date: May 15, 2006. Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison. [FR Doc. E6-8044 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary Notice of Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B (Formerly Subpart Q) During the Week Ending May 5, 2006 The following Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under subpart B (formerly subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et. seq.). The due date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate cases a final order without further proceedings. *Docket Number:* OST-2005-22228 and OST-2005-24735. *Date Filed:* May 3, 2006. *Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify Scope:* May 24, 2006. *Description:* Application of Cargoitalia, S.p.A. requesting a foreign air carrier permit to provide scheduled and charter air service of property and mail between Italy and the United States. Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison. [FR Doc. E6-8045 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration RTCA Government/Industry Air Traffic Management Advisory Committee AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of RTCA Government/Industry Air Traffic Management Advisory Committee. SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a meeting of RTCA Government/Industry Air Traffic Management Advisory Committee. DATES: The meeting will be held June 16, 2006, from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at FAA Headquarters, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Bessie Coleman Conference Center (2nd Floor), Washington, DC 20591. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036; telephone

(202)833-9339; fax

(202)833-9434; Web site *http://www.rtca.org.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is hereby given for the Air Traffic Management Advisory Committee meeting. **Note:** Non-Government attendees to the meeting must go through security and be escorted to and from the conference room. Attendees with laptops will be required to register them at the security desk upon arrival and departure. Agenda items will be posted on *http://www.rtca.org* Web site. Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. members of the public may present a written statement to the committee at any time. Issued in Washington, DC, on May 16, 2005. Francisco Estrada C. RTCA Advisory Committee. [FR Doc. 06-4861 Filed 5-24-05; 8:45am]

Connectionstraces to 12

Traces to 12 documents

U.S. Code