Notices. Notice of availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

38,297 words·~174 min read·/register/2006/07/25/06-6439

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

BILLING CODE 7050-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-483] Union Electric Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-30, issued to Union Electric Company (the licensee), for operation of the Callaway Plant, Unit 1 (Callaway), located in Callaway County, Missouri. The proposed amendment would delete the

(1)containment cooler condensate monitoring system and

(2)containment atmosphere gaseous radioactivity monitor from the limiting condition for operation in Technical Specification

(TS)3.4.15, “RCS [reactor coolant system] Leakage Detection Instrumentation.” The conditions, required actions, completion times, and surveillance requirements in TS 3.4.15 that are associated with both of these monitors would also be deleted from TS 3.4.15. This would remove these two monitors from the TSs as methods to detect an RCS leak rate of 1 gallon per minute

(gpm)in 1 hour. The licensee submitted its request to revise the TSs in its application dated July 19, 2006. This application supercedes the licensee's previous two applications dated August 26, 2005, and August 29, 2006, which proposed only to delete the containment atmosphere gaseous radioactivity monitor from TS 3.4.15. In its application, the licensee requested that the amendment be approved on an exigent basis, in accordance with Paragraph 50.91(a)(6) of Title 10 of the *Code of Federal Regulations* (10 CFR 50.91(a)(6)), by no later than August 8, 2006. The licensee provided the following basis for its request. On July 10, 2006, a Commission's resident inspector at Callaway identified a concern with the licensee using the containment cooler condensate monitoring system for RCS leakage detection in accordance with TS 3.4.15. Specifically, the resident inspector questioned the ability of the system to detect a 1 gpm RCS leak rate in 1 hour based on realistic or normal plant conditions. The licensee stated that in subsequent reviews it was unable to establish that the system could meet this criteria and declared the system inoperable on July 10, 2006, at 15:44 in the afternoon. Because the containment atmosphere gaseous radioactivity monitor had previously been declared inoperable because it could not be shown to meet this criteria, TS 3.4.15, with both monitors being inoperable, requires that the licensee analyze samples of the containment atmosphere, or verify RCS operational leakage is within limits by performance of an RCS watery inventory balance, once every 24 hours, and restore either of the two monitors within 30 days, or start shutting down. Since the licensee does not see the basis to justify that either of the two monitors can meet the criteria for TS 3.4.15, it has requested the exigent amendment to remove the two monitors from TS 3.4.15 and, thus, prevent the plant shut down starting 30 days after the containment cooler condensate monitoring system was declared inoperable (i.e., 30 days after July 10, 2006, at 15:44). The licensee concluded that it could not have reasonably foreseen or anticipated this situation and, therefore, could not have avoided the need for the exigent amendment request. Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not

(1)involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated;

(2)create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or

(3)involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

(1)Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? *Response:* No. The proposed change has been evaluated and determined to not increase the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The proposed change does not make any hardware changes and does not alter the configuration of any plant system, structure, or component (SSC). The proposed change will remove the containment cooler condensate monitoring system and the containment atmosphere gaseous radioactivity monitor as an option for meeting the OPERABILITY requirements for TS 3.4.15. The TS will continue to require diverse means of leakage detection equipment, thus ensuring that leakage due to RCS piping cracks would continue to be identified prior to propagating to the point of a pipe break and the plant shutdown accordingly. Therefore, the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated are not increased.

(2)Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? *Response:* No. The proposed change does not involve the use or installation of new equipment and the currently installed equipment will not be operated in a new or different manner. No new or different system interactions are created and no new processes are introduced. The proposed changes will not introduce any new failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident initiators not already considered in the design and licensing bases. The proposed change does not affect any SSC associated with an accident initiator. Based on this evaluation, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

(3)Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? *Response:* No. The proposed change does not alter any Reactor Coolant System

(RCS)leakage detection components. The proposed change will remove the containment cooler condensate monitoring system and the containment atmosphere gaseous radioactivity monitor as an option for meeting the OPERABILITY requirements for TS 3.4.15. This change is required since the level of radioactivity in the Callaway reactor coolant has become much lower than what was assumed in the [Callaway] FSAR [Final Safety Analysis Report] and the gaseous channel can no longer promptly detect a small RCS leak under normal conditions. Similarly, for certain combinations of essential service water

(ESW)temperature, outside air temperature and relative humidity, the containment cooler condensate monitoring system's ability to detect an RCS leak rate of 1 gpm in one hour is also uncertain. The proposed amendment continues to require diverse means of leakage detection equipment with capability to promptly detect RCS leakage. Although not required by TS, additional diverse means of leakage detection capability are available as described in the FSAR Section 5.2.5. Early detection of leakage, as the potential indicator of a crack(s) in the RCS pressure boundary, will thus continue to be in place so that such a condition is known and appropriate actions taken well before any such crack would propagate to a more severe condition. Based on this evaluation, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 14 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 14-day notice period. However, should circumstances change during the notice period, such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 14-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will consider all public and State comments received. Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the **Federal Register** a notice of issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently. Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this **Federal Register** notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings and Issuance of Orders” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/.* If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements:

(1)The name, address and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner;

(2)the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding;

(3)the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and

(4)the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner/requestor is aware and on which the petitioner/requestor intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petitioner/requestor must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner/requestor to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing. If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment. Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed by:

(1)First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff;

(2)courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff;

(3)e-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, *HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV;* or

(4)facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at

(301)415-1101, verification number is

(301)415-1966. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to *OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov.* A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to John O'Neill, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, 2300 N Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037, attorney for the licensee. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated July 19, 2006, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html.* Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of July 2006. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Jack Donohew, Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E6-11832 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 40-8102] Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Concerning the ExxonMobil Refining and Supply Company License Amendment Request for Alternate Groundwater Protection Standards at the Highland Reclamation Project AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myron Fliegel, Senior Project Manager, Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Telephone:

(301)415-6629; fax number:

(301)415-5955; e-mail: *mhf1@nrc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC)is considering the issuance of a license amendment to Source Materials License SUA-1139 issued to ExxonMobil Corporation (ExxonMobil, the licensee), to establish alternate groundwater protection standards for chromium, uranium, selenium, and nickel at the Highland Reclamation Project (Highland), located in Converse County, Wyoming. Pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR part 51 (Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions), the NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment

(EA)to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with ExxonMobil's proposed modifications to the groundwater protection standards for the Highland site. Based on this evaluation, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate for the proposed licensing action. The license amendment will be issued following the publication of this Notice. II. Environmental Assessment Introduction By letter dated January 16, 2006, ExxonMobil submitted an application to the NRC, requesting an amendment to Source Materials License SUA-1139 for the Highland Reclamation Project to modify the groundwater protection standards for chromium, uranium, selenium, and nickel at the designated point of compliance

(POC)wells in the license. In this regard, the NRC's groundwater protection standards in 10 CFR part 40, Appendix A, Criterion 5B(5) specify the following: 5B(5)—At the point of compliance, the concentration of a hazardous constituent must not exceed:

(a)The Commission approved background concentration of that constituent in the groundwater;

(b)The respective value given in the table in paragraph 5C if the constituent is listed in the table and if the background level of the constituent is below the value listed; or

(c)An alternate concentration limit established by the Commission. Further, groundwater monitoring to comply with the standards established in accordance with the above specifications is required by Criterion 7A. Consistent with the requirements of Criterion 7A, License Condition

(LC)33 of ExxonMobil's Source Materials License SUA-1139 specifies that a groundwater monitoring program must be conducted at the Highland site and ExxonMobil must comply with the established groundwater protection standards at the designated POC wells for the constituents of interest, including chromium, uranium, selenium, and nickel. For chromium and selenium, the groundwater protection standards for the Highland site were set at the Maximum Contaminant Levels

(MCLs)for those constituents in the table in paragraph 5C of 10 CFR part 40, Appendix A. The MCLs for the constituents listed in the table in paragraph 5C were derived from the MCLs established for those constituents in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA)National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs). For uranium and nickel, the groundwater protection standards were based on the NRC approved background concentrations for those constituents in the groundwater. However, in the years subsequent to the establishment of the groundwater protection standards in ExxonMobil's license, the MCLs for chromium and selenium in the EPA's NPDWRs have been modified and a new MCL for uranium has been promulgated. The former MCL for nickel in the NPDWRs (0.1 parts per million) was remanded in 1995, and there is now no EPA legal limit on the amount of nickel in drinking water. In light of the aforementioned changes to the EPA's NPDWRs, ExxonMobil has requested that Source Materials License SUA-1139 be amended to reflect the current MCLs for chromium, selenium, and uranium in the NPDWRs. In this regard, the staff notes that the table in paragraph 5C of 10 CFR part 40, Appendix A, has not yet been revised to reflect the current NPDWRs for chromium, selenium, and uranium. Additionally, even though the MCL for nickel has been remanded and nickel is no longer listed as a regulated contaminant in the NPDWRs, ExxonMobil has requested that its license be modified to incorporate the former MCL for nickel as the groundwater protection standard. In this regard, the NRC notes that the EPA believed that the 0.1 parts per million level for nickel would not cause any potential health problems. In accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR part 40, Appendix A, Criterion 5B(5)(c), the requested modifications to ExxonMobil's license would establish alternate concentration limits for chromium, uranium, selenium, and nickel for implementation of a groundwater corrective action program in the event a concentration limit is exceeded for any of those constituents at the designated POC wells. Correspondingly, the requested license modifications have the potential for impacting the quality of the groundwater offsite. The NRC staff has evaluated ExxonMobil's request and has developed this EA to support the detailed technical review of ExxonMobil's proposed modifications to the groundwater protection standards for the Highland site, in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR part 51. The Proposed Action The proposed action is to amend NRC Source Materials License SUA-1139 to reflect the current groundwater protection standards for chromium, uranium, and selenium in the EPA NPDWRs and incorporate the former groundwater protection standard for nickel, even though it is no longer a regulated constituent. ExxonMobil's objective in this proposal is to establish groundwater protection standards for the Highland site that are appropriate and consistent with the current standards for chromium, uranium, and selenium in the EPA NPDWRs and conservative with respect to the retention of a groundwater protection standard for nickel. Specifically, ExxonMobil has proposed the following modifications to the groundwater protection standards in LC 33 of the Highland license: Chromium would change from 0.05 milligrams per liter (mg/L) to 0.10 mg/L (the current MCL); uranium would change from the former radiotoxicity value of 0.43 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) (0.00065 mg/L) to the new chemical toxicity MCL of 0.03 mg/L (20 pCi/L); and selenium would change from 0.01 mg/L to 0.05 mg/L (the current MCL). The standard for nickel would change from the 0.02 mg/L background concentration in the groundwater to 0.1 mg/L (the equivalent of the EPA's former MCL of 0.1 parts per million). The Need for the Proposed Action The purpose of the proposed action is to establish groundwater protection standards for the Highland site which are consistent with the present or former EPA NPDWRs and correspondingly reflective of the understanding of the health and environmental impacts of specific contaminants in drinking water. With this EA, the NRC is fulfilling its responsibilities under the Atomic Energy Act to make a decision on a proposed license amendment for groundwater protection standards that ensures protection of public health and safety and the environment. The Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The staff has evaluated the potential impacts associated with ExxonMobil's proposed modifications to the groundwater protection standards for chromium, uranium, selenium, and nickel at the Highland site and determined that those effects are limited to the potential public health and safety impacts related to possible degradation of offsite groundwater quality and water utilization. In this case, the bounding or controlling environmental impact is related to the potential use of that groundwater for drinking water purposes. However, as noted in ExxonMobil's amendment request, ExxonMobil has proposed to establish onsite groundwater protection standards for chromium, uranium, and selenium at the designated POC wells that are reflective of the current EPA NPDWRs for those contaminants. Additionally, even though the drinking water standard for nickel was remanded more than a decade ago, ExxonMobil has proposed a conservative health based standard for nickel that is consistent with the former MCL (0.1 mg/L) for that constituent. Conceptually, the EPA has determined that the drinking water limits in the NPDWRs pose acceptable hazards. The NPDWRs effectively protect the public health and safety and the environment by limiting the concentrations of contaminants in drinking water. The NRC finds that ExxonMobil has proposed onsite groundwater protection standards for chromium, uranium, selenium, and nickel that are adequately protective of public health and safety and the environment. Groundwater protection standards that are consistent with EPA's NPDWRs also satisfy the intent of 10 CFR part 40, Appendix A, Criterion 5B(5)(b), recognizing the outdated table in paragraph 5(C). Further, in the event that any of the proposed groundwater protection standards for chromium, uranium, selenium, and nickel are exceeded, ExxonMobil's license specifies that a corrective action program must be proposed with the objective of returning the concentrations of those constituents to the values mandated in the license. These requirements will minimize the potential for any adverse impacts and further ensure the protection of public health and safety and the environment. Alternatives to the Proposed Action As the only reasonable alternative to the proposed action, the staff has considered denial of ExxonMobil's request ( *i.e.* , the no action alternative). Denial of ExxonMobil's request would result in no change in environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar, though, since both would be protective of offsite sources of drinking water. However, the no action alternative would leave the groundwater protection standards in ExxonMobil's license unnecessarily restrictive and out-of-date with respect to the current EPA NPDWRs and the present understanding of the potential health effects of certain contaminants in drinking water. Agencies and Persons Consulted This EA was prepared by NRC staff (Myron Fliegel, Senior Project Manager) and coordinated with the following agency:Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WDEQ). NRC staff provided a draft of its EA to WDEQ for review. In electronic correspondence dated June 13, 2006, the WDEQ indicated that it did not have any comments on the draft EA. The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action will not affect listed species or critical habitat. Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. Likewise, the NRC staff has determined that the proposed action is not the type of activity that has potential to cause effects on historic properties. Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Conclusion The NRC staff has prepared this EA in support of the proposed license amendment to modify the groundwater protection standards for the Highland site. Based upon the analysis contained in this EA, the staff concludes that proposed action will not have a significant effect on public health and safety and the environment. III. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of this EA, NRC has concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts from the proposed license amendment and has determined that the proposed action does not warrant the preparation of an environmental impact statement. Accordingly, it has been determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate. IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, including the application for amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.* From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related to this notice are as follows: 1. ExxonMobil Refining and Supply. Letter dated January 16, 2006, from D. Burnham, ExxonMobil, to G. Janosko, NRC, requesting amendment to License Condition 33 of Source Materials License SUA-1139 for the Highland Reclamation Project. (ML060260421) 2. E-mail correspondence dated February 7, 2006, from M. Fliegel, NRC, to D. Burnham, ExxonMobil, acknowledging receipt of the ExxonMobil January 16, 2006, license amendment request. (ML060400048) 3. E-mail correspondence dated June 13, 2006, from M. Thiesse, WDEQ, to M. Fliegel, NRC, indicating that WDEQ had no comments on the draft EA. (ML061670212) If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's Public Document Room

(PDR)Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of July, 2006. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Myron Fliegel, Senior Project Manager, Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. E6-11833 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Proposed Collection; Comment Request Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. Extension: Rule 15c3-4; SEC File No. 270-441; OMB Control No. 3235-0497. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is soliciting comments on the collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this existing collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget for extension and approval. Rule 15c3-4 (17 CFR 240.15c3-4) (the “Rule”) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* ) (the “Exchange Act”) requires certain broker-dealers that are registered with the Commission as OTC Derivatives Dealers to establish, document, and maintain a system of internal risk management controls. The Rule sets forth the basic elements for an OTC Derivatives Dealer to consider and include when establishing, documenting, and reviewing its internal risk management control system, which are designed to, among other things, ensure the integrity of an OTC Derivatives Dealer's risk measurement, monitoring, and management process, to clarify accountability at the appropriate organizational level, and to define the permitted scope of the dealer's activities and level of risk. The Rule also requires that management of an OTC Derivatives Dealer must periodically review, in accordance with written procedures, the OTC Derivatives Dealer's business activities for consistency with its risk management guidelines. The staff estimates that the average amount of time an OTC Derivatives Dealer will spend implementing its risk management control system is 2,000 hours and that, on average, an OTC Derivatives Dealer will spend approximately 200 hours each year reviewing and updating its risk management control system. Currently, five firms are registered with the Commission as an OTC Derivatives Dealer. The staff estimates that approximately one additional OTC Derivatives Dealer may become registered within the next three years. Accordingly, the staff estimates the total cost burden for six OTC Derivatives Dealers to be 1,200 hours annually. The staff believes that the cost of complying with Rule 15c3-4 will be approximately $205 per hour. 1 This per hour cost is based upon the annual average hourly salary for a compliance manager, who would generally be responsible for initially establishing, documenting, and maintaining an OTC Derivatives Dealer's internal risk management control system. The total annual cost for all affected OTC Derivatives Dealers is estimated to be $136,700, based on one firm spending 2,000 hours to implement an internal risk management control system at $205 per hour within the next three years. 1 Based on the average annual salary for a Compliance Manager based inside New York City of about $69,000, as reflected in SIA Management and Professional Earnings for 2005, modified to account for a 1,800-hour work-year and multiplied by 5.35 to account for bonuses, firm size, employee benefits and overhead. Written comments are invited on:

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;

(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this publication. Please direct your written comments to R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312 or send an e-mail to: *PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov.* Comments must be submitted to OMB within 60 days of this notice. Dated: July 17, 2006. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-11789 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Proposed Collections; Comment Request Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. Extensions: Form T-6; OMB Control No. 3235-0391; SEC File No. 270-344. Form 11-K; OMB Control No. 3235-0082; SEC File No. 270-101. Form 144; OMB Control No. 3235-0101; SEC File No. 270-112. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ) the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is soliciting comments on the collections of information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit these existing collections of information to the Office of Management Budget for extension and approval. Form T-6 (17 CFR 269.9) is a statement of eligibility and qualification for a foreign corporate trustee under the Trust Indenture Act of 1939 (15 U.S.C. 77aaa *et seq.* ). Form T-6 provides the basis for determining if a trustee is qualified. Form T-6 takes approximately 17 burden hours per response and is filed by 1 respondent. We estimate that 25% of the 17 total burden hours (4 hours) is prepared by the filer. The remaining 75% of burden hours is prepared by outside counsel. Form 11-K (17 CFR 249.311) is the annual report designed for use by employee stock purchase, savings and similar plans. Form 11-K provides employees with financial information so that they can assess the performance of the investment vehicle in which their money is invested. Form 11-K takes approximately 30 burden hours per response and is filed by 2,000 respondents for total of 60,000 burden hours. Form 144 (17 CFR 239.144) is used to report the sale of securities during any three-month period that exceeds 500 shares or other units or has an aggregate sales price in excess of $10,000. Form 144 operates in conjunction with Rule 144. Form 144 takes approximately 2 burden hours per response and is filed by 60,500 respondents for a total of 121,000 total burden hours. Written comments are invited on:

(a)Whether these proposed collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden imposed by the collections of information;

(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this publication. Please direct your written comments to R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312, or send an e-mail to: *PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov.* July 14, 2006. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-11790 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Proposed Collection; Comment Request Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. Extension: Rule 17a-11; SEC File No. 270-94; OMB Control No. 3235-0085. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is soliciting comments on the collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this existing collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget for extension and approval. In response to an operational crisis in the securities industry between 1967 and 1970, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) adopted Rule 17a-11 (17 CFR 240.17a-11) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* ) (“Exchange Act”) on July 11, 1971. The Rule requires broker-dealers that are experiencing financial or operational difficulties to provide notice to the Commission, the broker-dealer's designated examining authority (“DEA”), and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) if the broker-dealer is registered with the CFTC as a futures commission merchant. Rule 17a-11 is an integral part of the Commission's financial responsibility program which enables the Commission, a broker-dealer's DEA, and the CFTC to increase surveillance of a broker-dealer experiencing difficulties and to obtain any additional information necessary to gauge the broker-dealer's financial or operational condition. Rule 17a-11 also requires over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivatives dealers and broker-dealers that are permitted to compute net capital pursuant to Appendix E to Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1 to notify the Commission when their tentative net capital drops below certain levels. OTC derivatives dealers must also provide notice to the Commission of backtesting exceptions identified pursuant to Appendix F of Rule 15c3-1 (17 CFR 240.15c3-1f). Compliance with the Rule is mandatory. The Commission will generally not publish or make available to any person notice or reports received pursuant to Rule 17a-11. The Commission believes that information obtained under Rule 17a-11 relates to a condition report prepared for the use of the Commission, other federal governmental authorities, and securities industry self-regulatory organizations responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions. Only broker-dealers whose capital declines below certain specified levels or who are otherwise experiencing financial or operational problems have a reporting burden under Rule 17a-11. In 2005, the Commission received approximately 600 notices under this Rule. The Commission did not receive any Rule 17a-11 notices from OTC derivatives dealers or broker-dealers that are permitted to compute net capital pursuant to Appendix E to Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1. Each broker-dealer reporting pursuant to Rule 17a-11 will spend approximately one hour preparing and transmitting the notice required by the rule. Accordingly, the total estimated annualized burden under Rule 17a-11 is 600 hours. Written comments are invited on:

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(1)year until July 31, 2007, the current pilot program regarding transaction fees for trades executed through the intermarket options linkage (the “Linkage”) on the Exchange. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Amex's Web site at ( *http://www.amex.com* ), at the Amex'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, Amex 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 The Amex is proposing to extend for one

(1)year until July 31, 2007, the current pilot program establishing Exchange fees for Principal Orders (“P Orders”) and Principal Acting as Agent Orders (“P/A Orders”) submitted through the Linkage and executed on the Exchange. The fees in connection with the pilot program are scheduled to expire on July 31, 2006. 3 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52150 (July 28, 2005), 70 FR 44703 (August 3, 2005) (Amex File No. 2005-079). The current fees applicable to P Orders and P/A Orders executed on the Exchange are as follows:

(i)$0.10 per contract side options transaction fee for equity options (exchange traded fund share (“ETF”) options, QQQQ options and trust issued receipt options);

(ii)$0.21 per contract side options transaction fee for index options (including MNX and NDX options);

(iii)$0.05 per contract side options comparison fee;

(iv)$0.05 per contract side options floor brokerage fee; and

(v)an options licensing fee for certain ETF and index option products ranging from $0.20 per contract side to $0.05 per contract side depending on the particular ETF or index option. 4 These are the same fees charged to specialists and registered option traders (“ROTs”) for transactions executed on the Exchange. The Exchange does not charge for the execution of Satisfaction Orders sent through the Linkage. 4 *See* the Options Licensing Fee section of the Amex Options Fee Schedule available at * http://www.amex.com.* As was the case in the original pilot program and subsequent extensions, the Exchange believes that the existing fees currently charged to Exchange specialists and ROTs should also apply to executions resulting from Linkage Orders. Based on the experience to date, the Exchange believes that an extension of the pilot program for one

(1)year until July 31, 2007 is appropriate. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 5 regarding the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among exchange members and other persons using exchange facilities. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange believes that 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. 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-2006-62 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-Amex-2006-62. 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 Number SR-Amex-2006-62 and should be submitted on or before August 15, 2006. IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of the Proposed Rule Change After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange, 6 and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act 7 and the rules and regulations thereunder. The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 8 which requires that the rules of the Exchange provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its members and other persons using its facilities. The Commission believes that the extension of the Linkage fee pilot until July 31, 2007 will give the Exchange and the Commission further opportunity to evaluate whether such fees are appropriate. 6 In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). The Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 9 for approving the proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after publication of notice thereof in the **Federal Register** . The Commission believes that granting accelerated approval of the proposed rule change will preserve the Exchange's existing pilot program for Linkage fees without interruption as the Exchange and the Commission further consider the appropriateness of Linkage fees. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). V. Conclusion It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 10 that the proposed rule change (SR-Amex-2006-62) is hereby approved on an accelerated basis for a pilot period to expire on July 31, 2007. 10 *Id.* For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-11795 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54169; File No. SR-CBOE-2006-45] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change Regarding the Review Authority of the Board of Directors July 18, 2006. I. Introduction On May 5, 2006, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 a proposed rule change to amend its rules to clarify the authority of CBOE's Board of Directors (“Board”) with respect to actions or inactions of CBOE committees and CBOE officers, representatives, or designees. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on June 2, 2006. 3 The Commission received one comment letter regarding the proposal 4 and a response to the comment letter from the Exchange. 5 This order approves the proposed rule change. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53872 (May 25, 2006), 71 FR 32156. 4 *See* letter to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Commission, from Lawrence J. Blum, Member, CBOE, dated June 5, 2006 (“Blum Letter”). 5 *See* letter to Nancy Sanow, Assistant Director, Division of Market Regulation (“Division”), Commission, from Jennifer M. Lamie, Managing Senior Attorney, Legal Division, CBOE, dated July 7, 2006 (“CBOE Response Letter”). II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to add new CBOE Rule 2.2, *Power of the Board to Review Exchange Decisions* , which would provide that, in connection with any delegation to a committee or committees pursuant to Article EIGHTH of CBOE's Certificate of Incorporation (“Certificate”), the Board would retain the power and authority to review, affirm, modify, suspend, or overrule any and all actions or inactions of CBOE committees, and of all officers, representatives, or designees of CBOE. Proposed CBOE Rule 2.2 would not apply to actions taken (or inactions) pursuant to Chapters XVII ( *Discipline* ), XVIII ( *Arbitration* ), and XIX ( *Hearings and Review* ) of the Exchange's Rules, unless specifically provided for in those Rules, or to actions taken by (or inactions of) the Nominating Committee or Executive Committee pursuant to Article IV of the Exchange's Constitution, which sets forth the Exchange's nominations process. In addition, the proposed rule change would amend CBOE Rule 2.1, *Committees of the Exchange* , to clarify that CBOE committees would have, in addition to the powers and duties that are specifically granted in the Exchange's Constitution or Rules, only such other powers and duties as may be delegated to them by the Board. III. Discussion and Commission Findings The Commission has carefully reviewed the proposed rule change, the comment letter received, and the CBOE Response Letter, and finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act, 6 and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6 of the Act. 7 Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(1) of the Act, 8 which requires that an exchange be so organized and have the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the Act and to comply, and (subject to any rule or order of the Commission pursuant to Section 17(d) 9 or 19(g)(2) 10 of the Act) 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. 6 In approving this proposed rule change the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1). 9 15 U.S.C. 78q(d). 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(g)(2). The commenter asserted that the proposed rule change is unnecessary and generally in conflict with the CBOE Constitution. 11 The commenter also expressed concern that the aim of the proposed rule change is to reduce the influence of member/owners. 12 In response, the Exchange noted that CBOE is a membership corporation formed under Delaware's General Corporation Law, which provides that “the business and affairs of every corporation shall be managed by or under the direction of a board of directors, except as may be otherwise * * * provided in its certificate of incorporation * * * * ” 13 CBOE stated that its Certificate provides that the Board is CBOE's governing body and is vested with all powers necessary for the management of the Exchange's business and affairs, except to the extent that the authority, powers, and duties of such management are delegated to a committee or committees established pursuant to CBOE's Constitution or Rules. According to CBOE, its Certificate and Constitution provide that the Board may establish one or more committees, each of which has the authority, powers, and duties as may be prescribed in the Constitution, Exchange Rules, or by resolution of the Board. 14 CBOE advised that, under these provisions, it has established various committees and has delegated to those committees specific authority, powers, and duties. 11 *See* Blum Letter at 1, *supra* note 4. 12 *Id.* at 2. 13 *See* CBOE Response Letter, *supra* note 5, at 1. 14 *Id* . CBOE further noted that its Rules provide that each committee “is subject to the control and supervision of the Board.” 15 CBOE stated, however, that such supervisory power alone does not make explicit the power of the Board to directly modify or overrule the action (or inaction) of a committee when the decision-making authority with respect to the action has been delegated to the committee. CBOE pointed out that the specific delegations contained in its Constitution, Rules, and resolutions vary in scope: Some involve a complete delegation and others involve a limited delegation where the Board has explicitly or implicitly reserved certain authorities. CBOE noted that, although the specific delegations contained in its Constitution, Rules, and Board resolutions vary in describing the scope of the authority delegated, its Board retains the power to revoke, limit, or change a committee delegation, either by rule change or by resolution as appropriate. 15 CBOE Rule 2.1(d). The purpose of the proposed rule change, CBOE asserted, is to apply an explicit, uniform standard of review by the Board to the general organizational and administrative structure of CBOE's committees and to resolve any ambiguity that may exist. Thus, CBOE contended that the proposed rule change would clarify that the Board retains the power and authority to review, affirm, modify, suspend or overrule any and all actions or inactions of CBOE committees and officers, representatives, or designees, except as otherwise specified. In CBOE's view, the proposal is consistent with its Certificate and Constitution. CBOE also advised that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of its Constitution pertaining to the Executive Committee. CBOE stated that the Executive Committee is a committee of the Board that performs the functions of the Board when the Board is not in session or it is not practicable to arrange a meeting of the Board within the time reasonably available. Thus, to the extent that the Executive Committee would take any action pursuant to Article VII, Section 7.2 of its Constitution, CBOE asserted that the Board retains jurisdiction over those matters and may later determine to review, affirm, modify, suspend or overrule any and all actions of the Executive Committee. In the Commission's view, the Exchange has provided a sufficient basis on which the Commission can find that, as a federal matter under the Act, the Exchange is complying with its own Certificate and Constitution. Further, in approving this proposal, the Commission is relying on CBOE's representation that the proposed rule change is appropriate under Delaware state law. 16 Thus, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change clarifies the Board's review authority by providing an explicit, uniform standard to be applied to any delegation of Board authority, powers, and duties and is consistent with the Act. 16 Telephone conference among Jennifer M. Lamie, Managing Senior Attorney, Legal Division, CBOE; Leah Mesfin, Special Counsel, Division, Commission; and Jan Woo, Attorney, Division, Commission, on July 18, 2006. IV. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, 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, and in particular, with Section 6(b)(1) of the Act. 17 17 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1). *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 18 that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-CBOE-2006-45) is hereby approved. 18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 19 19 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-11793 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54164; File No. SR-CBOE-2006-60] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Duration of CBOE Rule 6.45A(b) Pertaining to Orders Represented in Open Outcry July 17, 2006. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on July12, 2006, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the CBOE. The Exchange filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. 5 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 5 The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay required by Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). See discussion *infra* Section III. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The CBOE proposes to extend the duration of CBOE Rule 6.45A(b) (the “Rule”), which relates to the allocation of orders represented in open outcry in equity option classes designated by the Exchange to be traded on the CBOE Hybrid Trading System (“Hybrid”) through October 31, 2006. No other substantive changes are being made to the Rule. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the CBOE's Internet Web site ( *http://www.cboe.com* ), at the CBOE's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the CBOE included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose In March 2005, the Commission approved revisions to CBOE Rule 6.45A related to the introduction of Remote Market-Makers. 6 Among other things, the Rule, pertaining to the allocation of orders represented in open outcry in equity options classes traded on Hybrid, was amended to clarify that only in-crowd market participants would be eligible to participate in open outcry trade allocations. In addition, the Rule was amended to limit the duration of the Rule until September 14, 2005. The duration of the Rule was thereafter extended through July 14, 2006. 7 As the duration period expired on July 14, 2006, the Exchange proposes to extend the effectiveness of the Rule through October 31, 2006. 8 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51366 (March 14, 2005), 70 FR 13217 (March 18, 2005) (SR-CBOE-2004-75). 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 52423 (September 14, 2005), 70 FR 55194 (September 20, 2005) (extending the duration of the Rule through December 14, 2005) and 52957 (December 15, 2005), 70 FR 76085 (December 22, 2005) (extending the Rule through March 14, 2006), and 53524 (March 21, 2006), 71 FR 15235 (March 27, 2006) (extending the duration of the Rule through July 14, 2006). 8 In order to effect proprietary transactions on the floor of the Exchange, in addition to complying with the requirements of the Rule, members are also required to comply with the requirements of Section 11(a)(1) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1), or qualify for an exemption. Section 11(a)(1) restricts securities transactions of a member of any national securities exchange effected on that exchange for

(i)the member's own account,

(ii)the account of a person associated with the member, or

(iii)an account over which the member or a person associated with the member exercises discretion, unless a specific exemption is available. The Exchange issued a regulatory circular to members informing them of the applicability of these Section 11(a)(1) requirements when the duration of the Rule was extended until December 14, 2005, March14, 2006 and again on July 14, 2006. *See* CBOE Regulatory Circulars RG05-103 (November 2, 2005), RG06-001 (January 3, 2006) and RG06-34 (April 7, 2006). The Exchange represents that it expects to issue a similar regulatory circular to members reminding them of the applicability of the Section 11(a)(1) requirements with respect to the proposed rule change. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations under the Act applicable to a national securities exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. 9 Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) 10 requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposal. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not

(1)significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;

(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(3)become operative for thirty days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 11 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 12 thereunder. 13 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 13 Pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange has given the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date on which the Exchange filed the proposed rule change. *See* 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). A proposed rule change filed under Commission Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 14 normally does not become operative prior to thirty days after the date of filing. The CBOE requests that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay, as specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), and designate the proposed rule change to become operative immediately to allow the Exchange to continue to operate under the existing allocation parameters for orders represented in open outcry in Hybrid on an uninterrupted basis. The Commission hereby grants the request. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because such waiver will allow the CBOE to continue to operate under the Rule without interruption. For these reasons, the Commission designates the proposed rule change as effective and operative upon filing. 15 14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 15 For the purposes only of waiving the operative date of this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in 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 No. SR-CBOE-2006-60 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-CBOE-2006-60. 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 CBOE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2006-60 and should be submitted on or before August 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. E6-11794 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54167; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-002] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Add Generic Listing Standards for Index-Linked Securities July 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 March 29, 2006, The NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC (“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 the Nasdaq. On May 5, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons and to approve the proposal on an accelerated basis. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1 Nasdaq made minor revisions to the proposed rule text. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Nasdaq proposes to reflect in the Nasdaq rules the generic listing standards for index-linked notes (“ILNs”) previously approved for NASD pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act. 4 These “generic” listing standards were recently approved by the Commission for The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (“Nasdaq Market”) as part of the NASD, Inc. rule book, 5 but because their approval came several days after the approval of Nasdaq's registration as a national securities exchange, 6 they were not a part of the Nasdaq rule set included in the Exchange Approval Order. 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53142 (Jan. 19, 2006), 71 FR 4180 (Jan. 25, 2006). 6 *See* Securities Act Release No. 53128 (Jan. 13, 2006), 71 FR 3550 (Jan. 23, 2006 “Exchange Approval Order”). The text of the proposed rule change is available on Nasdaq's Web site ( *http://www.nasdaq.com* ), at Nasdaq's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. The text of the proposed rule change is also set forth below. Proposed new language is *italicized* ; proposed deletions are in [brackets]. 4420. Quantitative Designation Criteria In order to be listed on the Nasdaq National Market, an issuer shall be required to substantially meet the criteria set forth in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), (j), (k), (l), [or]

(m)*or (n)* below. (a)-(l) No change.

(m)Index-Linked Securities *Index-linked securities are securities that provide for the payment at maturity of a cash amount based on the performance of an underlying index or indexes. Such securities may or may not provide for the repayment of the original principal investment amount. Nasdaq may submit a rule filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to permit the listing and trading of index-linked securities that do not otherwise meet the standards set forth below in paragraphs

(1)through (9). Nasdaq will consider for listing and trading pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 index-linked securities, provided:* *(1) Both the issue and the issuer of such security meet the criteria for other securities set forth in paragraph

(f)of this rule, except that the minimum public distribution of the security shall be 1,000,000 units with a minimum of 400 public holders, unless the security is traded in $1,000 denominations, in which case there is no minimum number of holders.* *(2) The issue has a term of not less than one

(1)year and not greater than ten

(10)years.* *(3) The issue must be the non-convertible debt of the issuer.* *(4) The payment at maturity may or may not provide for a multiple of the positive performance of an underlying index or indexes; however, in no event will payment at maturity be based on a multiple of the negative performance of an underlying index or indexes.* *(5) The issuer will be expected to have a minimum tangible net worth in excess of $250,000,000 and to exceed by at least 20% the earnings requirements set forth in paragraph (a)(1) of this Rule. In the alternative, the issuer will be expected:

(i)to have a minimum tangible net worth of $150,000,000 and to exceed by at least 20% the earnings requirement set forth in paragraph (a)(1) of this Rule, and

(ii)not to have issued securities where the original issue price of all the issuer's other index-linked note offerings (combined with index-linked note offerings of the issuer's affiliates) listed on a national securities exchange or traded through the facilities of Nasdaq exceeds 25% of the issuer's net worth.* *(6) The issuer is in compliance with Rule 10A-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.* *(7) Initial Listing Criteria-Each underlying index is required to have at least ten

(10)component securities. In addition, the index or indexes to which the security is linked shall either

(A)have been reviewed and approved for the trading of options or other derivatives by the Commission under Section 19(b)(2) of the 1934 Act and rules thereunder and the conditions set forth in the Commission's approval order, including comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements for non-U.S. stocks, continue to be satisfied, or

(B)the index or indexes meet the following criteria:* *(i) Each component security has a minimum market value of at least $75 million, except that for each of the lowest weighted component securities in the index that in the aggregate account for no more than 10% of the weight of the index, the market value can be at least $50 million;* *(ii) Each component security shall have trading volume in each of the last six months of not less than 1,000,000 shares, except that for each of the lowest weighted component securities in the index that in the aggregate account for no more than 10% of the weight of the index, the trading volume shall be at least 500,000 shares in each of the last six months;* *(iii) Each index will be calculated based on a capitalization, modified capitalization, price, equal-dollar or modified equal-dollar weighting methodology;* *(iv) Indexes based upon the equal-dollar or modified equal-dollar weighting method will be rebalanced at least quarterly;* *(v) In the case of a capitalization-weighted or modified capitalization-weighted index, the lesser of the five highest weighted component securities in the index or the highest weighted component securities in the index that in the aggregate represent at least 30% of the total number of component securities in the index, each have an average monthly trading volume of at least 2,000,000 shares over the previous six months;* *(vi) No underlying component security will represent more than 25% of the weight of the index, and the five highest weighted component securities in the index do not in the aggregate account for more than 50% of the weight of the index (60% for an index consisting of fewer than 25 component securities);* *(vii) 90% of the index's numerical value and at least 80% of the total number of component securities will meet the then current criteria for standardized option trading on a national securities exchange or a national securities association;* *(viii) Each component security shall be issued by a 1934 Act reporting company, shall be listed on Nasdaq or another national securities exchange, and shall be an “NMS stock” as defined in Rule 600 of SEC Regulation NMS; and* *(ix) Foreign country securities or American Depository Receipts (“ADRs”) that are not subject to comprehensive surveillance agreements do not in the aggregate represent more than 20% of the weight of the index.* *(8) Index Maintenance and Dissemination—(i) If the index is maintained by a broker-dealer, the broker-dealer shall erect a “firewall” around the personnel who have access to information concerning changes and adjustments to the index and the index shall be calculated by a third party who is not a broker-dealer.

(ii)The current value of an index will be widely disseminated at least every 15 seconds, except as provided in the next clause (iii).

(iii)The values of the following indexes need not be calculated and widely disseminated at least every 15 seconds if, after the close of trading, the indicative value of the index-linked security based on one or more of such indexes is calculated and disseminated to provide an updated value: CBOE S&P 500 BuyWrite Index(sm), CBOE DJIA BuyWrite Index(sm), CBOE Nasdaq-100 BuyWrite Index(sm).

(iv)If the value of an index-linked security is based on more than one index, then the composite value of such indexes must be widely disseminated at least every 15 seconds.* *(9) Surveillance Procedures. NASD will implement on behalf of Nasdaq written surveillance procedures for index-linked securities. Nasdaq will enter into adequate comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements for non-U.S. securities, as applicable.* *(10) Index-linked securities will be treated as equity instruments. Furthermore, for the purpose of fee determination, index-linked securities shall be deemed and treated as Other Securities.* [(m)] *(n)* NASD Regulation No change. 4450. Quantitative Maintenance Criteria

(a)and

(b)No change.

(c)Other Securities Designated Pursuant to Rule 4420(f) *and Index-Linked Securities* *(1)* The aggregate market value or principal amount of publicly held units *(except index-linked securities that were listed pursuant to Rule 4420(m))* must be at least $1 million. *(2) Delisting or removal proceedings will be commenced (unless the Commission has approved the continued trading) with respect to any index-linked security that was listed pursuant to paragraph (7)(B) of Rule 4420(m) if any of the standards set forth in paragraph (7)(B) of such rule are not continuously maintained, except that:* *(i) the criteria that no single component represent more than 25% of the weight of the index and the five highest weighted components in the index may not represent more than 50% (or 60% for indexes with less than 25 components) of the weight of the Index, need only be satisfied for capitalization weighted and price weighted indexes as of the first day of January and July in each year;* *

(ii)the total number of components in the index may not increase or decrease by more than 33 1/3 % from the number of components in the index at the time of its initial listing, and in no event may be less than ten

(10)components; * *(iii) the trading volume of each component security in the index must be at least 500,000 shares for each of the last six months, except that for each of the lowest weighted components in the index that in the aggregate account for no more than 10% of the weight of the index, trading volume must be at least 400,000 shares for each of the last six months; and* *(iv) in a capitalization-weighted or modified capitalization-weighted index, the lesser of the five highest weighted component securities in the index or the highest weighted component securities in the index that in the aggregate represent at least 30% of the total number of stocks in the index have had an average monthly trading volume of at least 1,000,000 shares over the previous six months.* *(3) With respect to an index-linked security that was listed pursuant to paragraph (7)(A) of Rule 4420(m), delisting or removal proceedings will be commenced (unless the Commission has approved the continued trading of the subject index-linked security) if an underlying index or indexes fails to satisfy the maintenance standards or conditions for such index or indexes as set forth by the Commission in its order under Section 19(b)(2) of the 1934 Act approving the index or indexes for the trading of options or other derivatives.* *(4) Delisting or removal proceedings will also be commenced with respect to any index-linked security listed pursuant to Rule 4420(m) (unless the Commission has approved the continued trading of the subject index-linked security), under any of the following circumstances:* *(i) if the aggregate market value or the principal amount of the securities publicly held is less than $400,000;* *(ii) if the value of the index or composite value of the indexes is no longer calculated or widely disseminated on at least a 15-second basis, provided, however, that the values of the following indexes need not be calculated and disseminated at least every 15 seconds if, after the close of trading, the indicative value of any index-linked security linked to one or more of such indexes is calculated and disseminated to provide an updated value: CBOE S&P 500 BuyWrite Index(sm), CBOE DJIA BuyWrite Index(sm), CBOE Nasdaq-100 BuyWrite Index(sm); or* *(iii) if such other event shall occur or condition exists which in the opinion of Nasdaq makes further dealings on Nasdaq inadvisable.*

(d)through

(i)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, Nasdaq 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. 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, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The proposed rule change will add generic listing standards to permit the listing and trading of ILNs pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act. 7 Rule 19b-4(e) provides that the listing and trading of a new derivative securities product by a self-regulatory organization shall not be deemed a proposed rule change, pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of Rule 19b-4, 8 if the Commission has approved, pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Act, 9 the self-regulatory organization's trading rules, procedures and listing standards for the product class that would include the new derivatives securities product, and the self-regulatory organization has a surveillance program for the product class. 10 7 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 8 17 CFR 240.19b-4(c)(1). 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b). 10 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40761 (Dec. 8, 1998), 63 FR 70952 (Dec. 22, 1998) (the “19b-4(e) Order”). Nasdaq believes adopting generic listing standards for these securities and applying Rule 19b-4(e) should fulfill the intended objective of that Rule by allowing those ILNs that satisfy the proposed generic listing standards to commence trading, without the need for the public comment period and Commission approval. This has the potential to reduce the time frame for bringing ILNs to market and thereby reduce the burdens on issuers and other market participants. The failure of a particular index to comply with the proposed generic listing standards under Rule 19b-4(e), however, would not preclude a separate filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(2), requesting Commission approval to list and trade a particular ILN. On January 19, 2006, the Commission approved the proposed ILN standards for the Nasdaq Market. 11 However, on January 13, 2006, the Commission also approved Nasdaq's registration as a national securities exchange, and because of the timing of the two approvals, the ILN standards were not included in the rule set that the Commission approved for Nasdaq. The purpose of this filing is to update the Nasdaq rules accordingly. 11 *See* NASD Rule 4420(m). The proposed Nasdaq Rule 4420(m) is the same 12 as the corresponding NASD Rule 4420(m) for the Nasdaq Market and will be administered in the same manner as the Nasdaq Market rule is being administered currently. The proposed rule will become operative as soon as Nasdaq begins its operations as an exchange. 12 This proposal includes two clarifications. First, it removes a potential conflict between the provisions of Rules 4450(c)(1) and 4450(c)(4)(i) by clarifying that Rule 4450(c)(1) does not apply to ILNs (and, therefore, the minimum aggregate market value or the principal amount of the publicly held securities is $400,000, as stated in Rule 4450(c)(4)(i)). Second, it clarifies in the wording of Rule 4420(m)(9) that despite NASD's obligations pursuant to a regulatory services agreement to surveil Nasdaq trading, Nasdaq itself must enter into appropriate written surveillance sharing agreements. *See* Nasdaq Rule 4420(n). The Commission made minor clarifying changes to this footnote to conform it with Amendment No. 1. Telephone conversation between Alex Kogan, Associate General Counsel, Nasdaq, Florence E. Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, and Rahman Harrison, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission on July 17, 2006. In transitioning to Nasdaq the ILNs that are listed on the Nasdaq Market, Nasdaq will deem all such ILNs, without exception, as subject to the continued listing standards in proposed Nasdaq Rules 4450(c)(3) and (c)(4). 13 13 The Commission deleted text from this paragraph pursuant to authorization by Nasdaq staff. Telephone conversation between Alex Kogan, Associate General Counsel, Nasdaq, Florence E. Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, and Rahman Harrison, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission on July 17, 2006. Index Securities will be treated as equity instruments and will be subject to all Nasdaq rules governing the trading of equity securities, including trading halt rules. Index Securities will be subject to the same fee schedule as Other Securities listed under Nasdaq Rule 4420(f). The applicable fee schedule is currently codified as Nasdaq Rule 4530. 2. Statutory Basis Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act, 14 in general, and with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 15 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 14 15 U.S.C. 78f. 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(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 Written comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, were neither solicited nor received. 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-2006-002 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-NASDAQ-2006-002. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the 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-2006-002 and should be submitted on or before August 15, 2006. IV. Commission's Findings After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 16 In particular, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 17 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 facilitating transactions in securities, and 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. 16 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 17 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The Commission has previously approved the listing and trading of several Index Securities based on a variety of debt structures and market indexes. 18 The Commission has also recently approved, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act, 19 generic listing standards for these securities for the Nasdaq Market, 20 that, in all material respects, are identical to those listing standards proposed by Nasdaq. 18 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 41091 (Feb. 23, 1999), 64 FR 10515 (Mar. 4, 1999) (Narrow-Based Index Options); 42787 (May 15, 2000), 65 FR 33598 (May 24, 2000) (ETFs); and 43396 (Sept. 29, 2000), 65 FR 60230 (Oct. 10, 2000) (TIRs). 19 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 20 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53142 (Jan. 19, 2006), 71 FR 4180 (Jan. 25, 2006). Consistent with its previous orders, the Commission believes that generic listing standards proposed by Nasdaq for Index Securities should fulfill the intended objective of Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act by allowing those Index Securities that satisfy the generic listing standards to commence trading without public comment and Commission approval. 21 This has the potential to reduce the time frame for bringing Index Securities to market and thereby reduce the burdens on issuers and other market participants and thus enhances investors' opportunities. 21 The Commission notes that the failure of a particular index to comply with the proposed generic listing standards under Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act, however, would not preclude Nasdaq from submitting a separate filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, requesting Commission approval to list and trade a particular index-linked product. A. Trading of Index Securities Taken together, the Commission finds that Nasdaq's proposal contains adequate rules and procedures to govern the trading of Index Securities listed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) on Nasdaq. All Index Security products listed under the standards will be subject to the full panoply of Nasdaq rules and procedures that now govern the trading of Index Securities and the trading of equity securities on Nasdaq. Nasdaq has proposed asset/equity requirements and tangible net worth for each Index Security issuer, as well as minimum distribution, principal/market value, and term thresholds for each issuance of Index Securities. As set forth more fully above, Nasdaq's proposed listing criteria include minimum market capitalization, monthly trading volume, and relative weighting requirements for the Index Securities. These requirements are designed to ensure that the trading markets for index components underlying Index Securities are adequately capitalized and sufficiently liquid, and that no one stock dominates the index. The Commission believes that these requirements should minimize the potential for of manipulation. The Commission also finds that the requirement that each component security underlying an Index Security be listed on a national securities exchange or traded through the facilities of a national securities system and subject to last sale reporting will contribute to the transparency of the market for Index Securities. Alternatively, if the index component securities are foreign securities that are not reporting companies, the generic listing standards permit listing of an Index Security if the Commission previously approved the underlying index for trading in connection with another derivative product and if certain surveillance sharing arrangements exist with foreign markets. The Commission believes that if it has previously determined that such index and its components were sufficiently transparent, then Nasdaq may rely on this finding, provided it has comparable surveillance sharing arrangements with the foreign market that the Commission relied on in approving the previous product. The Commission believes that by requiring pricing information for both the relevant underlying index or indexes and the Index Security to be readily available and disseminated, the proposed listing standards should help ensure a fair and orderly market for Index Securities approved pursuant to such proposed listing standards. The Commission also believes that the requirement that at least 90 percent of the component securities, by weight, and 80 percent of the total number of Underlying Securities, be eligible individually for options trading will prevent an Index Security from being a vehicle for trading options on a security not otherwise options eligible. Nasdaq has also developed delisting criteria that will permit Nasdaq to suspend trading of an Index Security in case of circumstances that make further dealings in the product inadvisable. The Commission believes that the delisting criteria will help ensure a minimum level of liquidity exists for each Index Security to allow for the maintenance of fair and orderly markets. Also, Nasdaq will commence delisting proceedings in the event that the value of the underlying index or index is no longer calculated and widely disseminated on at least a 15-second basis. 22 22 In the case of the BuyWrite Index Securities, CBOE disseminates a daily index value. Additionally, a daily indicative value for the product is also disseminated. B. Surveillance Nasdaq must have surveillance procedures to monitor trading in any products listed under the generic listing standards. An Index Security, just like an ETF, derives its value by reference to the underlying index. For this reason, the Commission has required that markets that list index based securities monitor the qualifications of not just the actual security ( *e.g.* , the ETF, index option, or Index Securities), but also of the underlying indexes (and of the index providers). In this regard, the Commission believes that a surveillance sharing agreement between a self-regulatory organization proposing to list a stock index derivative product and the self-regulatory organization trading the stocks underlying the derivative product is an important measure for surveillance of the derivative and underlying securities markets. When a new derivative securities product based upon domestic securities is listed and traded on an exchange or national securities association pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act, the self-regulatory organization should determine that the markets upon which all of the U.S. component securities trade are members of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (“ISG”), which provides information relevant to the surveillance of the trading of securities on other market centers. 23 For derivative securities products based on previously approved indexes that contain securities from one or more foreign markets, the self-regulatory organization should have a comprehensive Intermarket Surveillance Agreement, as prescribed in the prior Commission order, which covers the securities underlying the new securities product. 24 With respect to indexes not previously approved by the Commission, the Commission finds that Nasdaq's commitment to implement comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements, 25 as necessary, and the definitive requirements that:

(i)Each component security shall be a registered reporting company under the Act; and

(ii)no more than 20 percent of the weight of the Underlying Index or Underlying Indexes may be comprised of foreign country securities or ADRs not subject to a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement, 26 will make possible adequate surveillance of trading of Index Securities listed pursuant to the proposed generic listing standards. 23 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40761 (Dec. 8, 1998), 63 FR 70952 (Dec. 22, 1998) (File No. S7-13-98). ISG was formed on July 14, 1983, to, among other things, coordinate more effectively surveillance and investigative information sharing arrangements in the stock and options markets. The Commission notes that all of the registered national securities exchanges, as well as the NASD, are members of the ISG. 24 *Id.* 25 Proposed Nasdaq Rule 4420(m)(9). 26 Proposed Nasdaq Rules 4420(m)(7)(viii)-(ix). With regard to actual oversight, Nasdaq represents that its surveillance procedures are sufficient to detect fraudulent trading among members in the trading of Index Securities pursuant to the proposed generic listing standards. C. Acceleration The Commission finds good cause for approving proposed rule change, as amended, prior to the 30th day after the date of publication of notice of filing thereof in the **Federal Register** . The proposal implements generic listing standards substantially identical to those already approved for the Nasdaq Market. The Commission does not believe that Nasdaq's proposal raises any novel regulatory issues. The proposed generic listing criteria should enable more expeditious review and listing of Index Securities by Nasdaq, thereby reducing administrative burdens and benefiting the investing public. Thus, the Commission finds good cause to accelerate approval of the proposed rule change, as amended. V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 27 that the proposed rule change (SR-NASDAQ-2006-002), as amended, is hereby approved on an accelerated basis. 27 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 28 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 28 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-11788 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54170; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-006] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change as Amended by Amendment No. 1 Regarding Restrictions on Affiliations Between Nasdaq and Its Members July 18, 2006. I. Introduction On April 5, 2006, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission” or “SEC”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 a proposed rule change to govern affiliations between Nasdaq and its members and to limit in certain respects Nasdaq's regulatory authority with respect to members with which it is affiliated On April 12, 2006, Nasdaq filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on April 28, 2006. 3 The Commission received three comment letters on the proposal. 4 On June 20, 2006, Nasdaq filed a response to comments. 5 This order approves the proposed rule change, as amended. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53697 (April 21, 2006), 71 FR 25265. 4 *See* e-mail from Richard Gold, Missoula, MT, dated April 28, 2006 (“Gold E-mail”); and letters to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Commission from George R. Kramer, Deputy General Counsel, Securities Industry Association, dated May 19, 2006 (“SIA Letter”), and Kim Bang, Bloomberg L.P., dated May 17, 2006 (“Bloomberg Letter”). One commenter expressed general concerns about already approved Nasdaq rules requiring members to be broker-dealers, and did not address the substance of the proposal. *See* Gold E-mail. 5 *See* letter to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Commission, from Edward S. Knight, Executive Vice President and General Counsel, Nasdaq, dated June 20, 2006 (“Nasdaq Response Letter”). II. Description of Proposal Nasdaq Rule 2140 would prohibit Nasdaq or an entity with which it is affiliated from acquiring or maintaining an ownership interest in, or engaging in a business venture 6 with, a Nasdaq member or an affiliate of a Nasdaq member in the absence of an effective filing with the Commission under Section 19(b) of the Act. 7 Further, the rule would prohibit a Nasdaq member from becoming an affiliate 8 of Nasdaq or an affiliate of an entity affiliated with Nasdaq in the absence of an effective filing under Section 19(b) of the Act. 9 However, Nasdaq's rule excludes from this restriction two types of affiliations. 6 Nasdaq defines a “business venture” as an arrangement under which

(A)Nasdaq or an entity with which it is affiliated and

(B)a Nasdaq member or an affiliate of a Nasdaq member, engage in joint activities with the expectation of shared profit and a risk of shared loss from common entrepreneurial efforts. 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b). 8 Nasdaq defines the term “affiliate” under proposed Rule 2140 as having the meaning specified in Commission Rule 12b-2 under the Act; provided, however, that for purposes of Nasdaq Rule 2140, one entity shall not be deemed to be an affiliate of another entity solely by reason of having a common director. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b). First, a Nasdaq member or an affiliate of a Nasdaq member could acquire or hold an equity interest in The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. that is permitted pursuant to Nasdaq Rule 2130 without filing such acquisition or holding under Section 19(b) of the Act. 10 Second, Nasdaq or an entity affiliated with Nasdaq could acquire or maintain an ownership interest in, or engage in a business venture with, an affiliate of the Nasdaq member without filing such affiliation under Section 19(b) of the Act, if there were information barriers between the member and Nasdaq and its facilities. These information barriers would have to prevent the member from having an “informational advantage” concerning the operation of Nasdaq or its facilities or “knowledge in advance of other Nasdaq members” of any proposed changes to the operations of Nasdaq or its trading systems. Further, Nasdaq may only notify an affiliated member of any proposed changes to its operations or trading systems in the same manner as it notifies non-affiliated members. Nasdaq and its affiliated member may not share employees, office space, or data bases. Finally, the Nasdaq Regulatory Oversight Committee must certify, annually, that Nasdaq has taken all reasonable steps to implement, and comply with, the rule. 10 Nasdaq Rule 2130 provides that “[n]o member or person associated with a member shall be the beneficial owner of greater than twenty percent (20%) of the then-outstanding voting securities of The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc.” Finally, Nasdaq proposed to amend several of its disciplinary rules to provide that Nasdaq will not consider appeals of disciplinary actions by affiliated members. Instead, after an initial decision is rendered, the affiliated member could appeal directly to the Commission. III. Summary of Comments The Commission received three comments on the proposed rule change, as amended. 11 Two commenters believed that the rule was unclear and questioned whether it would be consistent with the requirements of Section 19(b) of the Act. 12 Specifically, one commenter believed that the rule would curtail the Commission's ability to review Nasdaq rules and provide an exemption to a broad category of core Nasdaq facilities from Commission review. 13 The other commenter believed that, by carving out many types of business arrangements (licensing agreements, provision of transactional services or data etc.) as outside of the definition of “business venture,” certain provisions of agreements “that today rise to the level of ‘SRO rules’ subject to Section 19(b) safeguards might potentially be avoided by simply shifting them to a new affiliate.” 14 11 *See supra* note 4. 12 *See* SIA Letter *supra* note 4; Bloomberg Letter *supra* note 4. 13 *See* Bloomberg Letter *supra* note 4, at 1-2. 14 *See* SIA Letter *supra* note 4, at 3. Both commenters also questioned why Nasdaq's proposed exemptions from the general rule requiring a filing with the Commission did not include all of the conditions set forth in an earlier Commission order (the “FSI Order”), 15 which allowed NASD and Nasdaq to develop trade analytics through a separate subsidiary without filing proposed rule changes on behalf of the subsidiary. 16 The commenters noted that the Commission granted the relief at issue in the FSI Order on several conditions “designed to ensure that

(a)the activities of FSI would not involve core functions of Nasdaq and

(b)FSI would not obtain any informational benefit from Nasdaq that would give it a commercial advantage over its competitors.” 17 By failing to cite the FSI Order and adhering to its conditions, one commenter believed that the proposal would allow business ventures involving affiliates to be executed without a filing with the Commission even where such agreements involved “fundamentally important or core services,” allowing the business venture to “benefit from Nasdaq's monopoly powers” with respect to such services. 18 15 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42713 (April 24, 2000) (2000 SEC LEXIS 807). 16 *See* Bloomberg Letter *supra* note 4, at 2; *See also* SIA Letter *supra* note 4, at 3. 17 *See* Bloomberg Letter *supra* note 4, at 2. *See also* SIA Letter *supra* note 4, at 3. 18 *See* Bloomberg Letter *supra* note 4, at 3. Finally, one commenter raised concerns with the broad exception to the filing requirement when certain information barriers exist between Nasdaq and its member or affiliate, noting that “[i]t is not clear how, absent a filing explaining how such conditions would be met in a particular business venture, anyone on the outside could determine in any given instance if Nasdaq and its venture partner in fact meet the requirements.” 19 19 *See* SIA Letter *supra* note 4, at 2. IV. Nasdaq's Response to Comments On June 20, 2006, Nasdaq responded to the issues raised by the commenters. 20 As a general preface, Nasdaq stated that it believed the concerns raised by the commenters reflected a “fundamental misunderstanding of the proposed rule change.” 21 Nasdaq explained that it designed the proposal to stipulate that Nasdaq would be required to file a rule change regarding a proposed affiliation under the circumstances described in the rule “even if the Act does not require it to do so” to address a concern that there may be conditions under which the Commission would have a “strong policy interest in reviewing an affiliation between a self-regulatory organization * * * and one of its members.” 22 20 *See* Nasdaq Response Letter *supra* note 5. 21 *See* Nasdaq Response Letter *supra* note 5, at 1. 22 *Id.* Nasdaq, citing the language of Rule 19b-4 referring to “facilities of the self-regulatory organization” and the definition of “facility” in Section 3(a)(2) of the Act, 23 explained that it was well-established that the rule filing obligations of Section 19(b) of the Act are triggered by changes to an SRO's facilities. 24 Conversely, Nasdaq stated, “business ventures that do not constitute SRO facilities, such as the state-regulated insurance brokerages that Nasdaq owns, are not subject to Section 19 of the Act.” 25 At the same time, contrary to the concerns expressed in the SIA Letter about Nasdaq avoiding the application of Section 19 by shifting certain operations to an affiliate, to the extent such activities constituted the operations of a facility, Section 19 would apply and require a filing, regardless of where the operations were located. 26 23 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(2). 24 *See* Nasdaq Response Letter *supra* note 5, at 1-2. 25 *Id.* at 2. 26 *Id.* at 2, n.3. Nasdaq makes clear that it was neither the intent nor effect of the proposal to alter the Section 19 rule filing obligations applicable to Nasdaq. Rather, proposed Rule 2140(a) imposes a rule filing obligation where Nasdaq or one of its affiliates seeks to “acquire or maintain an ownership interest in, or engage in a business venture with, a Nasdaq member or an affiliate” and proposed Rule 2140(b) makes clear that “[n]othing *in this rule* shall prohibit, or require a filing” (emphasis added) in the circumstances described in that part of the rule. 27 Nasdaq explains that the rule does not purport to describe the circumstances under which Section 19 of the Act would require a filing, and that in any event, Nasdaq could not by rule “place limits on the requirements of Section 19 in the absence of an exercise of the Commission's exemptive authority under Section 36 of the Act * * *.” 28 Nasdaq further states that the exceptions in Rule 2140(b) are exceptions only to the requirement in Rule 2140(a) and that “[w]hether Section 19 would require a filing in such circumstances would depend on the nature of the business venture, as it does today.” 29 27 *Id.* at 2. 28 *Id.* 29 *Id.* at 3. Nasdaq provided a hypothetical example to illustrate its point. According to Nasdaq, if the Nasdaq Stock Market Inc. and a diversified financial services holding company that also owned a Nasdaq member established a joint venture for trading precious metals in the spot market or for brokering commercial real estate in lower Manhattan, Nasdaq explained, the underlying activity would not be subject to a filing requirement under Section 19 because the joint venture would engage in activities not subject to Commission jurisdiction and would not be operated as a facility of Nasdaq. Although the joint venture would arguably result in an indirect affiliation between Nasdaq and one of its members, Nasdaq pointed out that its rule would not require a filing if the specified conditions of separation between the parties were in place. Nasdaq contrasted this scenario with a joint venture in which the hypothetical financial services holding company in question sold Nasdaq market data, in which case Section 19 of the Act would require a filing, regardless of its Rule 2140. V. Discussion and Commission Findings The Commission has carefully reviewed the proposed rule change, as amended, the comment letters, and the Nasdaq Response Letter, and finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act 30 and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 31 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 32 which requires that the an exchange have rules designed, among other things, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments and to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 30 15 U.S.C. 78f. 31 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* U.S.C. 78c(f). 32 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The Commission recently stated that it “is concerned about [the] potential for unfair competition and conflicts of interest between an exchange's self-regulatory obligations and its commercial interests that could exist if an exchange were to otherwise become affiliated with one of its members, as well as the potential for unfair competitive advantage that the affiliated member could have by virtue of informational or operational advantages, or the ability to receive preferential treatment.” 33 The Commission believes that Nasdaq's proposed rule is designed to mitigate these concerns. Nasdaq's rule makes it clear that affiliations between Nasdaq and its members must be filed with the Commission unless such affiliation is due to a member's interest in The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. permitted under Rule 2130 or conforms to the specified information barrier requirements. 33 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53382 (February 27, 2006), 71 FR 11251 (March 6, 2006) (order approving the New York Stock Exchange's merger with the Pacific Exchange). In its response letter, Nasdaq correctly noted that its rule does not, in any way, limit the Commission's authority under the Act. If Nasdaq entered into an affiliation with a member (or any other party) that resulted in a change to a Nasdaq rule or the need to establish new Nasdaq rules, as defined under the Act, then such affiliation would be subject to the rule filing requirements of Section 19(b) of the Act. Nasdaq Rule 2140 would have no affect on this statutory rule filing requirement. Finally, the Commission believes that Nasdaq's revisions to certain disciplinary rules are consistent with the Act and are designed to protect the integrity of the disciplinary process. These modifications, which specify that Nasdaq may not be involved in certain disciplinary actions involving members with which it is affiliated, insulate Nasdaq's role as an SRO from its commercial interests. VI. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 34 that the proposed rule change (SR-Nasdaq-2006-006) be, and hereby is, approved, as amended. 34 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 35 35 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-11796 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54166; File No. SR-NYSE Arca-2006-45] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Permit the Listing and Trading of Quarterly Options Series July 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 July 12, 2006, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“Exchange” or “NYSE Arca”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange has designated this proposal as non-controversial under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposed rule change effective upon filing with the Commission. The Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change on July 18, 2006. 5 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 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 5 In Amendment No. 1, a partial amendment, the Exchange made minor modifications to the proposed rule text. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend its rules to permit the listing and trading of quarterly options series. 6 The text of the proposed rule change, as amended, is set forth below. Proposed new language is in *italics* ; language proposed to be deleted is in [brackets]. 6 This proposal is substantially identical to a recently approved proposal by the International Securities Exchange (“ISE”) to list Quarterly Options Series on a pilot basis. *See* Securities Exchange Act Releases No. 53857 (May 24, 2006), 71 FR 31246 (June 1, 2006) (notice of filing); and 54113 (July 7, 2006), 71 FR 39694 (July 13, 2006) (approval order). Rules of NYSE Arca, Inc. Rule 5. Option Contracts Traded on the Exchange Rule 5.10. Applicability, Definitions and References

(a)No change.

(b)Definitions. Unless the context indicates otherwise, the following terms as used in this Section 3 shall have the meanings specified below. (1)-(25) No change. *(26) The term “Quarterly Options Series” means, for the purposes of this Rule 5, a series in an index options class that is approved for listing and trading on the Exchange in which the series is opened for trading on any business day and that expires at the close of business on the last business day of a calendar quarter.* Rule 5.15. Position Limits for Broad-Based Index Options (a)-(d) No change.

(e)Positions in One Week Option[s] Series *and Quarterly Options Series* shall be aggregated with positions in options contracts on the same index. Rule 5.16. Position Limits for Industry (Narrow-Based) Index Options (a)-(c) No change.

(d)Position *s* in One Week Option Series *and Quarterly Options Series* shall be aggregated with positions in options contracts on the same index. (e)-(g) No change. Rule 5.19. Terms of Index Option Contracts

(a)General (1)-(2) No change.

(3)Expiration Months. Index Option contracts may expire at three

(3)month intervals or in consecutive months. The Exchange may list up to six

(6)months at any one time, but will not list index options that expire more than twelve

(12)months out. One Week Option Series Pilot Program. Notwithstanding the preceding restriction, after an index option class has been approved for listing and trading on the Exchange, the Exchange may open for trading on any Friday that is a business day (“One Week Option Opening Date”) series of options on that class that expire at the close of business on the next Friday that is a business day (“One Week Option Expiration Date”). If the Exchange is not open for business on a Friday, the One Week Option Opening Date will be the first business day immediately prior to that Friday. Similarly, if the Exchange is not open for business on a Friday, the One Week Option Expiration Date will be the first business day immediately prior to that Friday. One Week Option Series shall be P.M. settled, except for One Week Option Series on indexes. One Week Option Series on indexes shall be A.M. settled. The Exchange may select up to five currently listed option classes on which One Week Option Series may be opened on any One Week Option Opening Date. In addition, to the five-option class restriction, the Exchange also may list One Week Option Series on any option classes that are selected by other securities exchanges that employ a similar Pilot Program under their respective rules. For each index option class eligible for participation in the One Week Option Series Pilot Program, the Exchange may open up to five One Week Option Series index options for each expiration date in that class. The strike price of each One Week Option Series will be fixed at a price per share, with at least two strike prices above and two strike prices below the calculated value of the underlying index value at about the time the One Week Option Series is opened for trading on the Exchange. No One Week Option Series on an index option class may expire in the same week during which any A.M. settled monthly option series on the same index class expire. The Exchange may continue to list One Week Option Series until the One Week Option Series Pilot Program expires on July 12, 2007. *Quarterly Options Series Pilot Program. Notwithstanding the restriction in this Rule 5.19(a)(3) above, for a pilot period, the Exchange may list and trade options series that expire at the close of business on the last business day of a calendar quarter (“Quarterly Options Series”). The Exchange may list Quarterly Options Series for up to five

(5)currently listed options classes that are either index options or options on exchange traded funds. In addition, the Exchange may also list Quarterly Options Series on any options classes that are selected by other securities exchanges that employ a similar pilot program under their respective rules. The pilot will commence the day the Exchange first initiates trading in a Quarterly Options Series or July 24, 2006, whichever is earlier. The Pilot Program will expire on July 10, 2007.* *The Exchange will list series that expire at the end of the next consecutive four

(a)No change.

(b)Definitions. The following terms as used in Rule 6 shall, unless the context otherwise indicates, have the meanings herein specified: (1)-(16) No change.

(17)Expiration Date. The term “expiration date” in respect of an option contract or Exchange-Traded Fund Share means 2:00 p.m. on the Saturday immediately following the third Friday of the expiration month. For a One Week Option Series the term “expiration date” shall mean the close of business on the next Friday that is a business day. If a Friday is not a business day, the “expiration date” shall be the close of business on the first business day immediately prior to that Friday. *For a Quarterly Options Series, the term “expiration date” shall mean the close of business on the last business day of a calendar quarter.* (18)-(41) No change. *(42) Quarterly Options Series. The term “Quarterly Options Series” means a series in an options class that is approved for listing and trading on the Exchange in which the series is opened for trading on any business day and that expires at the close of business on the last business day of a calendar quarter.* (c)-(e) No change. Rule 6.4. Series of Options Open for Trading

(a)After a particular class of options (call option contracts or put option contracts relating to a specific underlying stock, Exchange-Traded Fund Share or calculated index) has been approved for listing and trading on the Exchange, the Exchange shall from time to time open for trading series of options therein. Prior to the opening of trading in any series of options, the Exchange shall fix the expiration month and exercise price of option contracts included in each such series. For One Week Option Series, the Exchange will fix a specific expiration date and exercise price, as provided in Commentary .07 below. *For Quarterly Options Series, the Exchange will fix a specific expiration date and exercise price, as provided in Commentary .08 below* . Except for One Week Option Series *and Quarterly Options Series,* at the commencement of trading on the Exchange of a particular class of options, series of options therein having four different expiration months will normally be opened. Additional series of options of the same class may be opened for trading on the Exchange at or about the time a prior series expires. The exercise price of each series of options opened for trading on the Exchange shall be fixed at a price per share which is reasonably close to the price per share at which the underlying stock or Exchange-Traded Fund Share is traded in the primary market at or about the time such series of options is first opened for trading on the Exchange. Additional series of options of the same class may be opened for trading on the Exchange as the market price of the underlying stock or Exchange-Traded Fund Share moves substantially from the initial exercise price or prices. The opening of a new series of options on the Exchange shall not affect any other series of options of the same class previously opened. Commentary .07 will govern the procedures for opening One Week Option Series. *Commentary .08 will govern the procedures for opening Quarterly Options Series* . (b)-(e) No change. Commentary .01 through .07 No change. *.08 Quarterly Options Series Pilot Program. For a pilot period, the Exchange may list and trade options series that expire at the close of business on the last business day of a calendar quarter (“Quarterly Options Series”). The Exchange may list Quarterly Options Series for up to five

(4)calendar quarters, as well as the fourth quarter of the next calendar year. For example, if the Exchange is trading Quarterly Options Series in the month of May 2006, it will list series that expire at the end of the second, third and fourth quarters of 2006, as well as the first and fourth quarters of 2007. Following the second quarter 2006 expiration, the Exchange will add series that expire at the end of the second quarter of 2007.* *The Exchange will not list a One Week Option Series on an options class whose expiration coincides with that of a Quarterly Options Series on that same options class.* *The strike price of each Quarterly Options Series will be fixed at a price per share, with at least two strike prices above and two strike prices below the value of the underlying security at about the time that a Quarterly Options Series is opened for trading on the Exchange. The Exchange shall list strike prices for a Quarterly Options Series that are within $5 from the closing price of the underlying security on the preceding day. Additional Quarterly Options Series of the same class may be opened for trading on the Exchange when the Exchange deems it necessary to maintain an orderly market, to meet customer demand or when the market price of the underlying security moves substantially from the initial exercise price or prices. To the extent that any additional strike prices are listed by the Exchange, such additional strike prices shall be within $5 from the closing price of the underlying on the preceding day. The opening of new Quarterly Options Series shall not affect the series of options of the same class previously opened.* *The interval between strike prices on Quarterly Options Series shall be the same as the interval for strike prices for series in that same options class that expire in accordance with the normal monthly expiration cycle.* 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 amend its rules to accommodate the listing of options series that would expire at the close of business on the last business day of a calendar quarter (“Quarterly Options Series”). Quarterly Options Series could be opened on any approved options class 7 on a business day (“Quarterly Options Opening Date”) and would expire at the close of business on the last business day of a calendar quarter (“Quarterly Options Expiration Date”). The Exchange would list series that expire at the end of the next four consecutive calendar quarters, as well as the fourth quarter of the next calendar year. For example, if the Exchange were trading Quarterly Options Series in the month of May 2006, it would list series that expire at the end of the second, third, and fourth quarters of 2006, as well as the first and fourth quarters of 2007. Following the second quarter 2006 expiration, the Exchange would add series that expire at the end of the second quarter of 2007. 7 Quarterly Options Series may be opened in options on indexes or options on Exchange Traded Fund (“ETFs”) that satisfy the applicable listing criteria under NYSE Arca rules. Quarterly Options Series listed on currently approved options classes would be P.M.-settled and, in all other respects, would settle in the same manner as do the monthly expiration series in the same options class. The proposed rule change would allow the Exchange to open Quarterly Options Series on up to five currently listed options classes that are either index options or options on ETFs. The strike price for each series would be fixed at a price per share, with at least two strike prices above and two strike prices below the approximate value of the underlying security at about the time that a Quarterly Options Series is opened for trading on the Exchange. The Exchange may list strike prices for a Quarterly Options Series that are within $5 from the closing price of the underlying security on the preceding trading day. The proposal would permit the Exchange to open for trading additional Quarterly Options Series of the same class when the Exchange deems it necessary to maintain an orderly market, to meet customer demand, or when the current market price of the underlying security moves substantially from the exercise prices of those Quarterly Options Series that already have been opened for trading on the Exchange. In addition, the exercise price of each Quarterly Options Series on an underlying index would be required to be reasonably related to the current index value of the index at or about the time such series of options were first opened for trading on the Exchange. The term “reasonably related to the current index value of the underlying index” means that the exercise price is within thirty percent of the current index value. The Exchange would also be permitted to open for trading additional Quarterly Options Series on an underlying index that are more than thirty percent away from the current index value, provided that demonstrated customer interest exists for such series, as expressed by institutional, corporate, or individual customers or their brokers. Market-Makers trading for their own account shall not be considered when determining customer interest under this provision. Because monthly options series expire on the third Friday of their expiration month, a Quarterly Options Series, which would expire on the last business day of the quarter, could never expire in the same week in which a monthly options series in the same class expires. The same, however, is not the case for One Week Option Series. Quarterly Options Series and One Week Option Series on the same options class could potentially expire concurrently under the proposal. 8 Therefore, to avoid any confusion in the marketplace, the proposal stipulates that the Exchange may not list a One Week Option Series that expires at the end of the day on the same day as a Quarterly Options Series in the same class expires. In other words, the proposed rules would not permit the Exchange to list a P.M.-settled One Week Option Series on an ETF or an index that would expire on a Friday that is the last business day of a calendar quarter if a Quarterly Options Series on that ETF or index were scheduled to expire on that day. 8 The Exchange currently does not have any One Week Option Series listed for trading. However, the proposed rules would permit the Exchange to list an A.M.-settled One Week Option Series and a P.M.-settled Quarterly Options Series in the same options class that both expire on the same day ( *i.e.,* on a Friday that is the last business day of the calendar quarter). The Exchange believes that the concurrent listing of an A.M.-settled One Week Option Series and a P.M.-settled Quarterly Options Series on the same underlying ETF or index that expire on the same day would not tend to cause the same confusion as would P.M.-settled short term and quarterly series in the same options class, and would provide investors with an additional hedging mechanism. Finally, the interval between strike prices on Quarterly Options Series would be the same as the interval for strike prices for series in the same options class that expires in accordance with the normal monthly expiration cycles. The Exchange believes that Quarterly Options Series would provide investors with a flexible and valuable tool to manage risk exposure, minimize capital outlays, and be more responsive to the timing of events affecting the securities that underlie option contracts. At the same time, the Exchange is cognizant of the need to be cautious in introducing a product that can increase the number of outstanding strike prices. For that reason, the Exchange intends to employ a limited pilot program (“Pilot Program”) for Quarterly Options Series. Under the terms of the Pilot Program, the Exchange could select up to five option classes on which Quarterly Options Series may be opened on any Quarterly Options Opening Date. The Exchange would also be allowed to list those Quarterly Options Series on any options class that is selected by another securities exchange with a similar pilot program under its rules. The Exchange believes that limiting the number of options classes in which Quarterly Options Series may be opened would help to ensure that the addition of the new series through this Pilot Program will have only a negligible impact on the Exchange's and the Option Price Reporting Authority's (“OPRA”) quoting capacity. Also, limiting the term of the Pilot Program to a period of approximately one year will allow the Exchange and the Commission to determine whether the program should be extended, expanded, and/or made permanent. If the Exchange were to propose an extension or an expansion of the program, or were the Exchange to propose to make the Pilot Program permanent, the Exchange would submit, along with any filing proposing such amendments to the Pilot Program, a Pilot Program report (“Report”) that will provide an analysis of the Pilot Program covering the entire period during which the Pilot Program was in effect. The Report would include, at a minimum:

(1)Data and written analysis on the open interest and trading volume in the classes for which Quarterly Option Series were opened;

(2)an assessment of the appropriateness of the options classes selected for the Pilot Program;

(3)an assessment of the impact of the Pilot Program on the capacity of NYSE Arca, OPRA, and on market data vendors (to the extent data from market data vendors is available);

(4)any capacity problems or other problems that arose during the operation of the Pilot Program and how NYSE Arca addressed such problems;

(5)any complaints that NYSE Arca received during the operation of the Pilot Program and how NYSE Arca addressed them; and

(6)any additional information that would assist in assessing the operation of the Pilot Program. The Report must be submitted to the Commission at least sixty days prior to the expiration date of the Pilot Program. Alternatively, at the end of the Pilot Program, if the Exchange determines not to propose an extension or an expansion of the Pilot Program, or if the Commission determines not to extend or expand the Pilot Program, the Exchange would no longer list any additional Quarterly Options Series and would limit all existing open interest in Quarterly Options Series to closing transactions only. Finally, the Exchange represents that it has the necessary systems capacity to support new options series that will result from the introduction of Quarterly Options Series. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the introduction of Quarterly Options Series will attract order flow to the Exchange, increase the variety of listed options available to investors, and provide investors with a valuable hedging tool. For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 9 in general and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 10 in particular in that it is designed to facilitate transaction in securities, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to enhance competition, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The 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. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 11 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder. 12 Because the foregoing 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)does not become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder. 13 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 13 Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires the Exchange to give written notice to the Commission of its intent to file the proposed rule change five business days prior to filing. The Commission has determined to waive the five-day pre-filing requirement for this proposal. A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to waive the operative delay if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the operative delay to permit the Pilot Program extension to become effective prior to the 30th day after filing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Commission notes that the proposal is substantially identical to the ISE's Quarterly Option Series Pilot Program, previously published for comment and approved by the Commission, 14 and thus the Exchange's proposal raises no new issues of regulatory concern. Moreover, waiving the operative delay will allow the Exchange to immediately compete with other exchanges that list and trade quarterly options under similar programs, and consequently will benefit the public. Therefore, the Commission has determined to waive the 30-day delay and allow the proposed rule change to become operative immediately. 15 14 *See supra* note 6. 15 For purposes only of waiving the operative delay of this proposal, the Commission notes that it 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 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, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File No. SR-NYSEArca-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 Number SR-NYSEArca-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 Commissions 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-NYSEArca-2006-45 and should be submitted on or before August 15, 2006. 16 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 16 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-11797 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54174; File No. SR-Phlx-2006-40] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to Its Short Stock Interest, Dividend, and Merger Strategy Programs July 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 June 28, 2006, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which items have been substantially prepared by Phlx. Phlx has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge, pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. On July 18, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 5 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 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 5 In Amendment No. 1, Phlx incorporated the proposed definitions of the terms “short stock interest strategy,” “dividend strategy,” and “merger strategy” into its fee schedule and provided citations for the former definitions of “dividend spread” and“merger spread” in the purpose section of the proposal. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Phlx proposes to amend its schedule of fees to provide for a rebate of $0.08 per contract side for Registered Options Trader (“ROT”) executions and $0.07 per contract side for specialist executions made pursuant to a short stock interest strategy. In addition, the Exchange proposes to impose a fee cap of $1,000 on equity option transaction and comparison charges for short stock interest strategies executed on the same trading day in the same options class and to assess a $0.05 per contract side license fee for short stock interest strategies in connection with certain products that carry license fees. The Exchange is also proposing to amend its current definitions of dividend spread transactions and merger spread transactions and to add the new definitions for dividend, merger, and short stock interest strategies to its fee schedule. The text of the proposed rule change is available on Phlx's Web site at *http://www.phlx.com,* at the Office of the Secretary at Phlx, 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, as amended, and discussed any comments it received on the proposal. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose a. *Background.* Currently, the Exchange provides a rebate for certain contracts executed in connection with transactions occurring as part of a dividend or merger strategy. Specifically, for those options contracts executed pursuant to a dividend or merger strategy, the Exchange rebates $0.08 per contract side for ROT executions and $0.07 per contract side for specialist executions on the business day before the underlying stock's ex-date. The ex-date is the date on or after which a security is traded without a previously declared dividend or distribution. The net transaction and comparison charges after the rebate is applied are capped at $1,750 for merger strategies executed on the same trading day in the same options class and for dividend strategies on the same day in the same options class, except for a security with a declared dividend or distribution less than $0.25. In that instance, the net transaction and comparison charges after the rebate is applied are capped at $1,000 for dividend strategies on the same day in the same options class. 6 6 These fee caps are implemented after any applicable rebates are applied to ROT and specialist equity option transaction and comparison charges. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53529 (March 21, 2006), 71 FR 15508 (March 28, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-16). A $0.05 per contract side license fee is imposed for dividend strategies in connection with certain products that carry license fees. 7 The license fee is assessed on every transaction and is not subject to the $1,750 or $1,000 fee cap, nor does it count towards reaching the fee caps. The $1,000 and $1,750 fee caps and the $0.05 per contract side license fee are subject to a pilot program scheduled to expire on September 1, 2006. 8 7 For a complete list of these product symbols, see the Exchange's $60,000 Firm-Related Equity Option and Index Option Cap Fee Schedule. 8 These fee caps are implemented after any applicable rebates are applied to ROT and specialist equity option transaction and comparison charges. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53529 (March 21, 2006), 71 FR 15508 (March 28, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-16). b. *Proposal.* Phlx proposes to amend its schedule of fees to provide for a rebate of $0.08 per contract side for ROT executions and $0.07 per contract side for specialist executions made pursuant to a short stock interest strategy. The Exchange proposes to define a short stock interest strategy as “transactions done to achieve a short stock interest arbitrage involving the purchase, sale and exercise of in-the-money options of the same class.” In addition, the Exchange proposes to impose a fee cap of $1,000 on equity option transaction and comparison charges for short stock interest strategies executed on the same trading day in the same options class. Similar to the fee caps currently in effect in connection with dividend and merger spread transactions, 9 the fee cap will be implemented after any applicable rebates are applied to ROT and specialist equity option transaction and comparison charges. In addition, the Exchange is proposing to assess a $0.05 per contract side license fee for short stock interest strategies in connection with certain products that carry license fees. 10 The applicable license fee will be assessed on every transaction and will not be subject to the $1,000 fee cap, nor will it count towards reaching the $1,000 fee cap. 9 *See Id.* 10 For a complete list of these product symbols, see the Exchange's $60,000 Firm-Related Equity Option and Index Option Cap Fee Schedule. The short stock interest strategy rebate, $1,000 fee cap and $0.05 per contract side license fee would be effective beginning with trades settling on or after July 1, 2006. The short stock interest strategy $1,000 fee cap and $0.05 per contract side license fee would remain in effect as a pilot program that is scheduled to expire on September 1, 2006. 11 Consistent with the current rebate program for dividend and merger strategies, 12 any rebate request forms for short stock interest strategies would have to be submitted to the Exchange three business days following the end of the previous month. 11 The proposed pilot program will be in effect for the same time period as the $1,000 and $1,750 fee caps and the $0.05 per contract side license fee that is scheduled to expire on September 1, 2006. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53529 (March 21, 2006), 71 FR 15508 (March 28, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-16). 12 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53094 (January 10, 2006), 71 FR 2975 (January 18, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2005-75). The Exchange is also proposing to amend its current definitions of dividend spread transactions and merger spread transactions (hereinafter referred to as “dividend strategy,” “merger strategy,” or “dividend and merger strategies,” as applicable) and update its fee schedule accordingly. First, the Exchange proposes to amend the definitions of dividend and merger strategies in order to clarify that transactions done to achieve a dividend or merger arbitrage do not necessarily need to be “spreads” in order to qualify for the fee cap and rebate program currently in effect. It is the Exchange's understanding that each of these strategies can be achieved either by purchasing and selling the same option series or different options series. Accordingly, as explained in further detail below, the Exchange proposes to revise each definition to refer to each strategy as a “strategy” instead of as a “spread” and to change each definition in certain respects to make clear that transactions done to achieve a dividend or merger arbitrage that involve only one options series may also qualify for the above-referenced fee cap and rebate. Second, the Exchange is proposing changes to the definition of each strategy to better reflect the similarities between the strategies. Dividend and merger strategies are strategies that have similar economic risks and are executed in similar ways. Each definition would be clarified to reflect that each strategy involves the “purchase, sale and exercise” of options. Each definition would also be clarified to reflect that the options involved must be of the “same class.” The Exchange currently defines a dividend strategy for purposes of the rebate and fee cap as “any trade done within a defined time frame pursuant to a strategy in which a dividend arbitrage can be achieved between any two deep-in-the-money options.” 13 The Exchange proposes to change “dividend spread” to “dividend strategy,” and proposes to define a dividend strategy as “transactions done to achieve a dividend arbitrage involving the purchase, sale and exercise of in-the-money options of the same class, executed prior to the date on which the underlying stock goes ex-dividend.” The word “two” is not included in the new definition so that transactions involving only a single options series that are done to achieve a dividend arbitrage may also qualify for the fee cap and rebate. The word “deep” is also not included in the new definition because the options used do not necessarily need to be deep-in-the-money options and also because of the difficulty in defining what constitutes “deep” in-the-money. The definition is clarified by making explicit two requirements: the options must be of the same class and the transactions must be effected on the day prior to the date on which the underlying stock goes ex-dividend. 13 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53094 (January 10, 2006), 71 FR 2975 (January 18, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2005-75) and 51596 (April 21, 2005), 70 FR 22381 (April 29, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-19). The Exchange currently defines a merger strategy for purposes of the fee cap and rebate as a “transaction executed pursuant to a merger spread strategy involving the simultaneous purchase and sale of options of the same class and expiration date, but with different strike prices, followed by the exercise of the resulting long options position, each executed prior to the date on which shareholders of record are required to elect their respective form of consideration, *i.e.* , cash or stock.” 14 The Exchange proposes to change “merger spread” to “merger strategy,” and proposes to define a merger strategy as “transactions done to achieve a merger arbitrage involving the purchase, sale and exercise of options of the same class and expiration date, executed prior to the date on which shareholders of record are required to elect their respective form of consideration, *i.e.* , cash or stock.” The proposed definition does not include the words “but with different strike prices” so that transactions involving only a single options series that are done to achieve a merger arbitrage may also qualify for the fee cap and rebate. The word “simultaneous” is also not included in the new definition because the purchase and sale transactions do not necessarily need to be executed simultaneously. 14 *Id.* The Exchange represents that the purpose of the proposed rule change is to attract additional order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that implementing a rebate and fee cap for short stock interest spread strategies, similar to the rebates and fee caps currently in place for dividend and merger strategy strategies, should increase the Exchange's ability to compete with other options exchanges for order flow in connection with this options strategy. 15 15 Other options exchanges currently allow for reduced and/or capped fees for short interest spread transactions. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53172 (January 24, 2006), 71 FR 5093 (January 31, 2006) (SR-CBOE-2006-07); 53412 (March 3, 2006), 71 FR 12752 (March 13, 2006) (SR-CBOE-2006-20); 53413 (March 3, 2006), 71 FR 13202 (March 14, 2006) (SR-PCX-2006-06); and 53415 (March 3, 2006), 71 FR 12745 (March 13, 2006) (SR-Amex-2006-10). The Exchange also represents that the purpose of amending the definitions of dividend strategies and merger strategies is to add clarity and to make the definitions more consistent with each other and with the proposed definition of short stock interest strategies, which should in turn, reflect the similarities among the strategies. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 16 in general, and Section 6(b)(4), 17 in particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees and other charges among its members. 16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 17 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that proposed rule change, as amended, will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others No written comments were either solicited or received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing rule change, as amended, has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 18 and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder 19 because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge. 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. 20 18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 19 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 20 The effective date of the original proposed rule change is June 28, 2006, the date of the original filing, and the effective date of Amendment No. 1 is July 18, 2006, the filing date of the amendment. For purposes of calculating the 60-day abrogation period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change, as amended, under Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission considers the period to commence on July 18, 2006, the date on which the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2006-40 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-2006-40. 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 Phlx. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2006-40 and should be submitted on or before August 15, 2006. 21 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 21 J. Lynn Taylor, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-11792 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration # 10519 and # 10520] New York Disaster Number NY-00022 AGENCY: Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 1. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of New York (FEMA-1650-DR), dated 07/03/2006. *Incident:* Severe Storms and Flooding. *Incident Period:* 06/26/2006 and continuing through 07/10/2006. *Effective Date:* 07/10/2006. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 09/01/2006. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/03/2007. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, National Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the State of New York, dated 07/03/2006, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 06/26/2006 and continuing through 07/10/2006. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Cheri L. Cannon, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E6-11785 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration # 10515 and # 10516] Pennsylvania Disaster Number PA-00004 AGENCY: Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 4. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (FEMA-1649-DR), dated 07/04/2006. *Incident:* Severe Storms, Flooding, and Mudslides. *Incident Period:* 06/23/2006 and continuing through 07/10/2006. *Effective Date:* 07/10/2006. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 09/05/2006. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/04/2007. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, National Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, dated 07/04/2006, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 06/23/2006 and continuing through 07/10/2006. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Cheri L. Cannon, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E6-11783 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration # 10515 and # 10516] Pennsylvania Disaster Number PA-00004 AGENCY: Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 5. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (FEMA-1649-DR), dated 07/04/2006. *Incident:* Severe Storms, Flooding, and Mudslides. *Incident Period:* 06/23/2006 through 07/10/2006. *Effective Date:* 07/14/2006. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 09/05/2006. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/04/2007. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, National Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster declaration for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, dated 07/04/2006 is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Bradford, Carbon, Luzerne. *Contiguous Counties:* Pennsylvania: Tioga; New York: Chemung. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Cheri L. Cannon, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E6-11786 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Privacy Act of 1974, as Amended; Alteration to Existing System of Records AGENCY: Social Security Administration (SSA). ACTION: Altered system of records, including proposed new routine uses. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4) and (e)(11)), we are issuing public notice of our intent to alter an existing system of records entitled *Medicare Part D and Part D Subsidy File, 60-0321.* The proposed alterations will result in the following changes to the system of records:

(1)Expansion of the categories of individuals covered by the system to include individuals entitled to Medicare Part A, Part B and Medicare Advantage Part C; and

(2)Proposed new routine uses 17-21 providing for the release of information for purposes of efficient administration of Medicare Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, and Medicare Part D. We are also changing the name of the existing *Medicare Part D and Part D Subsidy File* system of records. The proposed new name is the *Medicare Database,* hereinafter referred to as the *MDB File.* The change reflects the establishment of a single repository for all Medicare-related data. The proposed alterations are discussed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. We invite public comments on this proposal. DATES: We filed a report of the proposed alteration with the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform, and the Director, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)on July 18, 2006. The proposed alteration will become effective on August 26, 2006 unless we receive comments that will result in a contrary determination. ADDRESSES: Interested individuals may comment on this publication by writing to the Executive Director, Office of Public Disclosure, Office of the General Counsel, Social Security Administration, Room 3-A-6 Operations Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235-6401. All comments received will be available for public inspection at the above address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine W. Johnson, Lead Social Insurance Specialist, Office of Public Disclosure, Office of the General Counsel, Social Security Administration, Room 3-C-1 Operations Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235-6401, telephone at

(410)965-8563, e-mail: *mailto:chris.w.johnson@ssa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background and Purpose of Proposed Alteration to the MDB File System of Records A. General Background On December 8, 2003, the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act (also known as the Medicare Modernization Act or MMA) of 2003, created a voluntary prescription drug coverage benefit program under new Part D of Medicare for all individuals eligible for Medicare Part A and/or Part B. The MMA also created a subsidy program to assist Medicare beneficiaries with limited means to pay for prescription drug coverage. The new Medicare Part D was implemented January 2006. We published a notice of system of records in the **Federal Register** to implement the Medicare Part D coverage on December 28, 2004. The notice can be found at 70 FR 77816, December 28, 2004. Additionally, Section 811 of the MMA established a premium subsidy reduction which will result in an income-related adjustment amount being added to the standard monthly Medicare Part B premium amount. The Medicare Part B premium subsidy reduction becomes effective January 2007. Sections 101 and 201 of the MMA changed some of the terms and definitions for Medicare Part C (now Medicare Advantage) and provided for the implementation of the Medicare Advantage program. Medicare Part B is a voluntary program which provides medical insurance coverage for medical and health services such as physician services, diagnostic services and medical supplies. Medicare Part B beneficiaries are responsible for deductibles, co-insurance and monthly premiums towards the cost of covered services. Generally, the Part B premium covers approximately 25 percent of the Part B program costs and the remaining 75 percent of the program costs are subsidized by the Federal Government by contributions to the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund. Certain Part B beneficiaries may also pay an increased premium for late reenrollment or for enrollment after a period without coverage. Beginning January 2007, the Medicare Part B premium subsidy will result in an income-related adjustment amount being added to the standard monthly Medicare Part B premium amount for an estimated 4 to 5 percent of the approximately 40 million Part B beneficiaries who have income above an income threshold set by the MMA. Beneficiaries with modified adjusted gross income above a statutory income threshold will pay more of the cost of their Part B premiums through an income-related monthly adjustment amount. The income-related monthly adjustment amount is an additional amount of premium for Part B coverage that is added to the Part B standard monthly premium. The purpose of the income-related adjustment is to reduce the Federal subsidy to Medicare Part B beneficiaries with income above the statutory threshold. To implement the Medicare Part B premium subsidy reduction and establish eligibility for Part D subsidies, we must collect and maintain relevant information that will be used for these determinations. We will maintain the information in the *MDB File.* We currently maintain information about Medicare Part A and Part C applicants and beneficiaries in other SSA systems of records ( *e.g.* , the Master Beneficiary Record and the Claims Folders System). To assist us in the efficient administration of Medicare Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, and Medicare Part D programs, we are consolidating all of the relevant records into the *MDB File.* In addition to these changes, we are also establishing new routine use disclosures of *MDB File* information. To implement these changes, we must make alterations to the *MDB File.* The alterations are discussed in Section I, Subsections B and C below. B. Expansion of the Categories of Individuals Covered by the MDB File System of Records (1.) Expansion of the Categories of Individuals in the MDB File Currently, the records in the system pertain primarily to beneficiaries with limited means to pay for prescription drug coverage under Medicare Part D. The purpose of the proposed alteration is to expand the categories of individuals covered by this system to include beneficiaries who have medical insurance under Medicare Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, and all beneficiaries who are covered or who will be eligible for facilitated enrollment under Part D plans. See the “Categories of individuals covered by the system” in the system notice below for the inclusion of the additional categories of individuals and a full description of the information maintained therein. (2.) Name Change for the Existing Medicare Part D and Part D Subsidy File System of Records We propose to change the name of the existing system to t he MDB File system of records to facilitate and reflect the formation of a single repository for the collection and maintenance of all Medicare-related data. C. Proposed New Routine Use Disclosures of Data Maintained in the MDB File System of Records 1. Establishment of New Routine Uses We are proposing to establish five new routine uses to allow disclosure of information maintained in the *MDB File.* The routine uses will facilitate disclosures to applicants, claimants, prospective applicants or claimants (other than the data subjects and their authorized representatives); the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; the Railroad Retirement Board; the Office of Personnel Management; the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals; and the Medicare Appeals Council in the Department of Health and Human Services, in pursuit of Part B premium reduction based on participation in a Part C Medicare Advantage Plan; Medicare Part B and Part C premium collection; all Medicare enrollment, premium collection and reduction, and Part B premium income-related monthly adjustment amount determinations and appeals of determinations. Accordingly, proposed new routine uses numbered 17-21 that we are adding to the MDF File provide for the disclosure of information as follows: *17. “To applicants, claimants, prospective applicants or claimants (other than the data subjects and their authorized representatives) to the extent necessary for the purpose of pursuing Medicare Part B premium reduction based on participation in certain Part C Medicare Advantage plans;”* *18. “To applicants, claimants, prospective applicants or claimants (other than the data subjects and their authorized representatives) to the extent necessary for the purpose of administering Medicare Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, and Medicare Part D, including but not limited to pursuing Medicare Part B, Part C and Part D premium collection;”* *19. “To the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), for the purpose of administering Medicare Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, and Medicare Part D, including but not limited to: Medicare Part C enrollment and premium collection processes; Part D enrollment and premium collection processes; Medicare Part B premium reduction based on participation in a Part C plan; and Medicare Part B enrollment and income-related monthly adjustment amount determinations, appeals of determinations, and premium collection;”* *20. “To CMS, the Railroad Retirement Board and the Office of Personnel Management for purposes of administering Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, and Medicare Part D, including, but not limited to, collecting Medicare Part B premiums, which include an income-related monthly adjustment amount,” and* *21. “To the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals and to the Medicare Appeals Council in the Department of Health and Human Services for purposes of appeals of determinations of Medicare Part B income-related monthly adjustment amount determinations made by SSA.”* 2. Compatibility of Proposed New Routine Uses The Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3)) and SSA's disclosure regulation (20 CFR Part 401) permit us to disclose information under a published routine use for a purpose that is compatible with the purpose for which we collected the information. The proposed routine uses above will ensure efficient administration of SSA programs administered through the *MDB File.* Therefore, the proposed routine uses are appropriate and meet the relevant statutory and regulatory criteria. II. Records Storage Medium and Safeguards for the Proposed MDB File System of Records The *MDB File* is a repository of Medicare applicant and beneficiary information. Only authorized SSA personnel who have a need for the information in the performance of their official duties will be permitted access to the information. We will safeguard the security of the information by requiring the use of access codes to enter the computer systems that will maintain the data and will store computerized records in secured areas that are accessible only to employees who require the information to perform their official duties. Any manually maintained records will be kept in locked cabinets or in otherwise secure areas. Furthermore, SSA employees having access to SSA databases maintaining personal information must sign a sanction document annually, acknowledging their accountability for making unauthorized access to, or disclosure of, such information. Contractors generally do not have access to the *MDB File;* however, should this change in the future, contractor personnel having access to data in the *MDB File* will be required to adhere to SSA rules concerning safeguards, access and use of the data. SSA personnel having access to the data on this system will be informed of the criminal penalties of the Privacy Act for unauthorized access to or disclosure of information maintained in this system. See 5 U.S.C. 552a(i)(1). III. Effect of the Proposed MDB File System of Records on the Rights of Individuals The proposed alteration to the *MDB File* system of records pertains to SSA's responsibilities in expanding the categories of individuals maintained in the file to include beneficiaries who are eligible for Medicare Part A, Part B and Medicare Advantage Part C. We will adhere to all applicable statutory requirements, including those under the Social Security Act and the Privacy Act, in carrying out our responsibilities. Therefore, we do not anticipate that the proposed alterations will have any unwarranted adverse effect on the rights of individuals. IV. Change in the Name of the Existing Medicare Part D and Part D Subsidy File System of Records We will change the name of the existing system of records to the *Medicare Database

(MDB)File* to reflect the establishment of a single repository for all Medicare-related information needed to efficiently administer the Medicare Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C and Medicare Part D programs. Dated: July 18, 2006. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner. Social Security Administration

(SSA)Notice of System of Records Required by the Privacy Act of 1974; as Amended 60-0321 System Name: Medicare Database

(MDB)File, Social Security Administration, Deputy Commissioner for Disability and Income Security Programs. Security Classification: None. System Location: Social Security Administration, National Computer Center, Office of Systems, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235. Other authorized Federal and State agencies that generally have access to information in SSA systems will also have access as needed to the *MDB File.* Contact the system manager for address information. Categories of Individuals Covered by the System: Claimants, applicants, beneficiaries, ineligible spouses and potential claimants for Medicare Part A, Medicare Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, Medicare Part D and for Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage subsidies. Categories of Records in the System: This file contains the name, Social Security number

(SSN)and income and resource data of the claimant or potential claimant for Part D subsidy; the subsidy application; supporting evidence and documentation for eligibility; documentation for income and resource verification; supporting evidence and documentation for appeal requests; premium payment documentation; correspondence to and from claimants and/or personal representatives; and leads information from third parties such as social service agencies and hospitals. Further, separate files may be maintained of certain actions which are entered directly into the MDB file. These relate to reports of changes of income and resources and other post-adjudicative reports. Separate data are also maintained for statistical purposes ( *e.g.* , subsidy denial, and demographic and statistical information relating to subsidy decisions). This file also contains information about Medicare Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, and non-subsidy Medicare Part D beneficiaries. The information maintained in this system of records is collected from beneficiaries for Medicare Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, Medicare Part D, and other source systems maintained by SSA. The information maintained for Part B also include: The individual's name and SSN; enrollment information; premium surcharge information; information from the Internal Revenue Service about such individual's modified adjusted gross income

(MAGI)from his/her Federal tax return, including adjusted gross income (AGI), and other tax-exempt income, and tax filing status for each year that the MAGI exceeds a statutory income threshold. Also included is information about MAGI provided by a claimant or beneficiary; supporting evidence and documentation for new initial determinations and appeal requests; Medicare Part B income-related monthly adjustment amount determinations; reconsiderations and appeals of Medicare Part B income-related monthly adjustment amount determinations; information essential to the deduction of premiums from Title II monthly benefits from Railroad Retirement annuities, Civil Service retirement benefits and direct billing by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; and data necessary to providing fiscal accounting of premiums withheld. The file may also contain data collected as a result of inquires or complaints, and evaluation and measurement studies of the effectiveness of Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act

(MMA)policies. Authority for Maintenance of the System: Sections 202-205, 223, 226, 228, 1611, 1631, 1818, 1836, 1839, 1840 and 1860D-1-1860D-15 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402-405, 423, 426, 428, 1382, 1383, 1395i-2, 1395o, 1395r-1, 1395s and 1395w-101-1395w-115). Purpose(s): The *MDB File* is used for the collection and maintenance of material related to Medicare Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, and Medicare Part D, including, but not limited to: Part D participation and premium deductions, and where applicable, subsidized prescription drug coverage eligibility information; Medicare Part B enrollment, surcharge and premium reduction information for participants in certain Medicare Advantage plans and for maintaining information necessary to set income-related monthly adjustment amounts to Part B premiums for certain individuals who exceed an income threshold; and Part C premium deduction authorized by the MMA. The information in this file is used throughout SSA for the purposes of collecting, documenting, organizing and maintaining information and documents for making determinations about eligibility for subsidized benefits, premium reductions and deduction under the MMA. Routine uses of records maintained in the system, including categories of users and the purposes of such uses: Disclosures may be made for routine uses as indicated below. However, any information defined as “return or return information” under 26 U.S.C. 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code

(IRC)will not be disclosed unless authorized by the IRC, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), or IRS regulations. 1. To the Office of the President for the purpose of responding to an individual pursuant to an inquiry received from that individual or from a third party on his or her behalf. 2. To a congressional office in response to an inquiry from that office made at the request of the subject of a record. 3. To the Department of Justice (DOJ), a court or other tribunal, or another party before such tribunal when:

(a)SSA, or any component thereof; or

(b)Any SSA employee in his/her official capacity; or

(c)Any SSA employee in his/her individual capacity where DOJ (or SSA where it is authorized to do so) has agreed to represent the employee; or

(d)The United States or any agency thereof where SSA determines that the litigation is likely to affect the operations of SSA or any of its components is party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and SSA determines that the use of such records by DOJ, a court or other tribunal, or another party before such tribunal, is relevant and necessary to the litigation, provided, however, that in each case, SSA determines that such disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the records were collected. 4. Information may be disclosed to DOJ for:

(a)Investigating and prosecuting violations of the Social Security Act to which criminal penalties attach;

(b)Representing the Commissioner; or

(c)Investigating issues of fraud by agency officers or employees, or violation of civil rights. 5. To applicants, claimants, prospective applicants or claimants (other than the data subjects and their authorized representatives) to the extent necessary for the purpose of pursuing Medicare Part D and Part D subsidy entitlement or appeal rights. 6. To Federal, State, or local agencies (or agents on their behalf) for administering cash or non-cash income maintenance or health maintenance programs (including programs under the Social Security Act). Such disclosures include, but are not limited to, release of information to:

(a)The Railroad Retirement Board for administering provisions of the Railroad Retirement and Social Security Acts relating to railroad employment and for administering the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act;

(b)The Department of Veterans Affairs

(VA)for administering 38 U.S.C. 412, and upon request, information needed to determine eligibility for, or amount of, VA benefits or verifying other information with respect thereto;

(c)The Department of Labor for administering provisions of Title IV of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act, as amended by the Black Lung Benefits Act;

(d)State agencies for making determinations of Medicaid eligibility; and

(e)State agencies for making determinations of food stamp eligibility under the food stamp program;

(f)State audit agencies for auditing Medicaid eligibility considerations; and

(g)State welfare departments pursuant to agreements with SSA for administration of State supplementation payments; for enrollment of welfare recipients for medical insurance under section 1843 of the Act; and for conducting independent quality assurance reviews of Supplemental Security Income recipient records, provided that the agreement for Federal administration of the supplementation provides for such an independent review. 7. To the Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, for the purpose of auditing SSA's compliance with the safeguard provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. 8. To the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), for the purpose of administering Medicare Part D enrollment and premium collection and Medicare Advantage Part C premium collections, as well as Medicare Part B income-related monthly adjustment amounts. 9. To Federal and State agencies administering Medicare Part D and Part D subsidy under the MMA of 2003. For example, release of information to:

(a)The Bureau of Public Debt, Department of the Treasury;

(b)The Internal Revenue Service;

(c)The Office of Personnel Management;

(d)The Railroad Retirement Board;

(e)The Veterans Administration; and

(f)The Office of Child Support Enforcement for the purpose of assisting in the verification of eligibility for the prescription drug subsidy. 10. To a Federal, State, or congressional support agency ( *e.g.* , the Congressional Budget Office and the Congressional Research Service in the Library of Congress) for research, evaluation, or statistical studies. Such disclosures include, but are not limited to, release of information in assessing the extent to which one can predict eligibility for Supplemental Security Income

(SSI)payments or Social Security disability insurance benefits; examining the distribution of Social Security benefits by economic and demographic groups and how these differences might be affected by possible changes in policy; analyzing the interaction of economic and non-economic variables affecting entry and exit events and duration in the Title II Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance and the Title XVI SSI disability programs; and analyzing retirement decisions focusing on the role of Social Security benefit amounts, automatic benefit recomputation, the delayed retirement credit, and the retirement test, if SSA:

(a)Determines that the routine use does not violate legal limitations under which the record was provided, collected, or obtained;

(b)Determines that the purpose for which the proposed use is to be made:

(i)Cannot reasonably be accomplished unless the record is provided in a form that identifies individuals;

(ii)Is of sufficient importance to warrant the effect on, or risk to, the privacy of the individual which such limited additional exposure of the record might bring;

(iii)Has reasonable probability that the objective of the use would be accomplished;

(iv)Is of importance to the Social Security program or the Social Security beneficiaries or is for an epidemiological research project that relates to the Social Security program or beneficiaries;

(c)Requires the recipient of information to:

(i)Establish appropriate administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to prevent unauthorized use or disclosure of the record and agree to on-site inspection, by SSA's personnel, its agents, or by independent agents of the recipient agency, of those safeguards;

(ii)Remove or destroy the information that enables the individual to be identified at the earliest time at which removal or destruction can be accomplished consistent with the purpose of the project, unless the recipient receives written authorization from SSA that it is justified, based on research objectives, for retaining such information;

(iii)Make no further use of the records except

(a)Under emergency circumstances affecting the health or safety of any individual following written authorization from SSA;

(b)For disclosure to an identified person approved by SSA for the purpose of auditing the research project;

(iv)Keep the data as a system of statistical records. A statistical record is one which is maintained only for statistical and research purposes and which is not used to make any determination about an individual;

(d)Secures a written statement by the recipient of the information attesting to the recipient's understanding of, and willingness to abide by, the provisions. 11. The Department of Homeland Security, Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services, upon request, to identify and locate aliens in the United States pursuant to section 290(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1360(b)). 12. To contractors and other Federal agencies, as necessary, for the purpose of assisting SSA in the efficient administration of its programs. We contemplate disclosing information under this routine use only in situations in which SSA may enter a contractual or similar agreement with a third party to assist in accomplishing an agency function relating to this system of records. 13. Addresses of beneficiaries who are obligated on loans held by the Secretary of Education or a loan made in accordance with 20 U.S.C. 1071, *et seq.* (the Robert T. Stafford Student Loan Program) may be disclosed to the Department of Education as authorized by section 489A of the Higher Education Act of 1965. 14. To student volunteers and other workers, who technically do not have the status of Federal employees, when they are performing work for SSA as authorized by law, and who need access to personally identifiable information in SSA records in order to perform their assigned Agency functions. 15. To Federal, State and local law enforcement agencies and private security contractors, as appropriate, information necessary: • To enable them to protect the safety of SSA employees and customers, the security of the SSA workplace and the operation of SSA facilities; or • To assist investigations or prosecutions with respect to activities that affect such safety and security or activities that disrupts the operation of SSA facilities. 16. To the General Services Administration

(GSA)and the National Archives Records Administration

(NARA)under 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906, as amended by the NARA Act of 1984, non-tax return information which is not restricted from disclosure by Federal law for the use of those agencies in conducting records management studies. 17. To applicants, claimants, prospective applicants or claimants (other than the data subjects and their authorized representatives) to the extent necessary for the purpose of pursuing Medicare Part B Premium Reduction based on participation in a Medicare Advantage Part C Plan. 18. To applicants, claimants, prospective applicants or claimants (other than the data subjects and their authorized representatives) to the extent necessary for the purpose of administering Medicare Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, and Medicare Part D, including, but not limited to, pursuing Medicare Part B, Part C and Part D premium collection. 19. To the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, for the purpose of administering Medicare Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, and Medicare Part D, including but not limited to: Medicare Part C enrollment and premium collection processes; Part D enrollment and premium collection processes; Medicare Part B premium reduction based on participation in a Part C plan and Medicare Part B enrollment and income-related monthly adjustment amount determinations, appeals of determinations, and premium collection. 20. To the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the Railroad Retirement Board and the Office of Personnel Management for the purpose of administering Medicare Part A, Part B, Medicare Advantage Part C, and Medicare Part D, including, but not limited to, collecting Medicare Part B premiums, some of which include an income-related monthly adjustment amount. 21. To the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals and to the Medicare Appeals Council in the Department of Health and Human Services for purposes of appeals of determinations of Medicare Part B income-related monthly adjustment amount determinations made by SSA. We will disclose information to the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals and to the Medicare Appeals Council under this routine use only for the purpose of assisting that office with appeals of Medicare Part B income-related monthly adjustment amount decisions. Disclosure to Consumer Reporting Agencies: Disclosure pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(12) may be made to consumer reporting agencies as defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a(f)) or the Federal Claims Collection Act of 1966 (31 U.S.C. 3701, *et seq.* ), as amended. The disclosure will be made in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3711(e) when authorized by sections 204(f), 808(e), or 1631(b)(4) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 404(f), 1008(e), or 1383(b)(4)). The purpose of this disclosure is to aid in the collection of outstanding debts owed to the Federal government, typically, to provide an incentive for debtors to repay delinquent Federal government debts by making these debts part of their credit records. The information to be disclosed is limited to the individual's name, address, SSN, and other information necessary to establish the individual's identity, the amount, status, and history of the debt and the agency or program under which the debt arose. Policies and Practices for Storing, Retrieving, Accessing, Retaining, and Disposing of Records in the System: Storage: Records are maintained electronically. Any manually maintained records will be kept in locked cabinets or in otherwise secure areas. Retrievability: Records are retrieved electronically by SSN and alphabetically by name. Safeguards: The MDB File is protected through limited access to SSA records. Access to the records is limited to those employees who require such access in the performance of their official duties. All employees are instructed about SSA confidentiality rules as a part of their initial orientation training. Safeguards for automated records have been established in accordance with the Systems Security Handbook. For computerized records, electronically transmitted between SSA's central office and field office locations (including organizations administering SSA programs under contractual agreements), safeguards include a lock/unlock password system, exclusive use of leased telephone lines, a terminal oriented transaction matrix, and an audit trail. Retention and Disposal: Pursuant to 36 CFR 1228.26, SSA will submit to NARA, for approval, a schedule for the MDB, no later than one year from implementation of this new program. Until a schedule is developed and approved, records may not be destroyed. System Manager(s) and Address: Deputy Commissioner, Disability and Income Security Programs, Social Security Administration, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235. Notification Procedure: An individual can determine if this system contains a record about him/her by writing to the system manager(s) at the above address and providing his/her name, SSN or other information that may be in the system of records that will identify him/her. An individual requesting notification of records in person should provide the same information, as well as provide an identity document, preferably with a photograph, such as a driver's license or some other means of identification. If an individual does not have any identification documents sufficient to establish his/her identity, the individual must certify in writing that he/she is the person claimed to be and that he/she understands that the knowing and willful request for, or acquisition of, a record pertaining to another individual under false pretenses is a criminal offense. If notification is requested by telephone, an individual must verify his/her identity by providing identifying information that parallels information in the record for which notification is being requested. If it is determined that the identifying information provided by telephone is insufficient, the individual will be required to submit a request in writing or in person. If an individual is requesting information by telephone on behalf of another individual, the subject individual must be connected with SSA and the requesting individual in the same phone call. SSA will establish the subject individual's identity (his/her name, SSN, address, date of birth and place of birth along with one other piece of information such as mother's maiden name) and ask for his/her consent to providing information to the requesting individual. If a request for notification is submitted by mail, an individual must include a notarized statement to SSA to verify his/her identity or must certify in the request that he/she is the person claimed to be and that he/she understands that the knowing and willful request for, or acquisition of, a record pertaining to another individual under false pretenses is a criminal offense. These procedures are in accordance with SSA regulations (20 CFR 401.40(c)). Record Access Procedures: Same as Notification procedures. Requesters should also reasonably specify the information they are seeking. These procedures are in accordance with SSA regulations (20 CFR 401.40(c)). Contesting Record Procedures: Same as Notification procedures. Requesters should also reasonably identify the record, specify the information they are contesting and state the corrective action sought, and the reasons for the correction, with supporting justification showing how the record is incomplete, untimely, inaccurate or irrelevant. These procedures are in accordance with SSA regulations (20 CFR 401.65(a)). Record Source Categories: Information in this system is obtained from claimants, beneficiaries, applicants and recipients; accumulated by SSA from reports of employers or self-employed individuals; various local, State, and Federal agencies; claimant representatives and other sources to support factors of entitlement and continuing eligibility or to provide leads information. Systems Exempted From Certain Provisions of the Privacy Act: None. [FR Doc. E6-11782 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4191-02-P SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Privacy Act of 1974; as Amended; New System of Records and New Routine Use Disclosures AGENCY: Social Security Administration (SSA). ACTION: Proposed new system of records and routine uses. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4) and (e)(11)), we are issuing public notice of our intent to establish a new system of records entitled *Attorney and Eligible Direct Pay Non-Attorney (EDPNA) 1099-MISC File* , hereinafter referred to as the *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* system of records, and routine uses applicable to the system of records. We are also issuing notice that we may disclose personally identifiable information from the *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* to consumer reporting agencies in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(12) and 31 U.S.C. 3711(e). Further, we give notice that we will disclose the taxpayer identification numbers (TIN)/Social Security numbers

(SSN)and other information maintained in this file to employers for the purpose of reporting and collecting delinquent debts that may arise out of representational fee payments made to representatives. See 31 U.S.C. 7701(c)(3). We invite public comment on this proposal. DATES: We filed a report of the proposed *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* system of records and the applicable routine uses with the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform, and the Director, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)on July 18, 2006. The proposed *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* system of records and the proposed routine uses will become effective on August 26, 2006, unless we receive comments warranting that they not be effective. ADDRESSES: Interested individuals may comment on this publication by writing to the Deputy Executive Director, Office of Public Disclosure, Office of the General Counsel, Social Security Administration, 3-A-6 Operations Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235-6401. All comments received will be available for public inspection at the above address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine W. Johnson, Lead Social Insurance Specialist, Strategic Issues Team, Office of Public Disclosure, Office of the General Counsel, Social Security Administration, Room 3-A-6 Operations Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235-6401, telephone:

(410)965-8563, e-mail: *chris.w.johnson@ssa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background and Purpose of the Proposed New Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File System of Records A. General Background Under sections 206(a) and 1631(d)(2) of the Social Security Act and sections 302 and 303 of the Social Security Protection Act

(SSPA)of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-203), SSA has the authority and responsibility to determine the maximum fees that claimants' representatives may charge and collect from claimants they represent before SSA, and to directly pay those fees out of claimants' past-due benefits, to attorney and EDPNA representatives. SSA is also responsible to directly pay fees awarded to an attorney by a Federal court under sections 206(b) and 1631(d)(2) of the Act. Changes in the Internal Revenue Service Federal Income Tax Regulations (26 CFR part 1), promulgated under sections 6041 and 6045 of the Internal Revenue Code

(IRC)require SSA, in the course of its business, to issue 1099-MISC information returns for aggregate payments of $600.00 or more in a calendar year. The returns must be filed whether or not the services were performed for SSA. Therefore, representatives who meet the requirements to receive representational fee payments and do not waive payment from SSA could meet the reporting requirement of the IRC. Further, when the attorney or EDPNA representative works for an employer ( *e.g.* , law firm, partnership or other business entity) and we have the employer's name, address and EIN information in our file a 1099-MISC information return will also be issued to the employer. Further, the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, 31 U.S.C. 7701, requires all persons doing business with a federal agency to provide TINs/SSNs. A person is considered to be “doing business” with an agency if the agency assesses a fee on the person. Under sections 206(d) and 1631(d)(2)(C) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 406(d) and 1383(d)(2)(C)), SSA assesses a fee for determining and paying the fee each time it directly pays a representational fee to a claimant's representative. Moreover, the representational fees that SSA directly pays to representatives are funds withheld from benefit payments that are redirected to the representatives from claimants. Therefore, SSA is “doing business” with all representatives that it pays. To this end, pursuant to the Debt Collection Improvement Act, SSA will also use the TINs/SSNs maintained in the *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* for the purpose of reporting and collecting any delinquent debts that may arise out of the representational fee payments that SSA makes to representatives. Thus, the proposed *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* will facilitate the efficient collection and maintenance of data needed for the verification and issuance of 1099-MISC information returns for reporting purposes, as well as the reporting and collection of delinquent debts that may arise from payments to representatives. For example, the file will maintain the names of representatives eligible to receive direct fee payments, TINs/SSNs, tax mailing address, notice/payment address, each individual payment amount, and sanction history as appropriate. The file will also retain employer identification data and any other information required by the Commissioner for verification and issuance of 1099-MISC information returns. The proposed *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* not only responds to the requirements of the IRC, it also facilitates accuracy in SSA recordkeeping and SSA efforts to collect debts arising out of the direct payment of representational fees. B. Collection and Maintenance of Data in the Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File System of Records The Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File will maintain identifying information on all representatives who receive direct fee payments for services performed for claimants before SSA and the Federal courts, and on their employers. See the “Categories of records” section of the notice below for a full description of the data that will be maintained in the system of records. II. Proposed Routine Use Disclosures of Data Maintained in the Proposed Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File System of Records A. Proposed Routine Use Disclosures We are proposing to establish the following routine use disclosures of information that will be maintained in the proposed new Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File system of records: 1. To the Office of the President for the Purpose of Responding to an Individual Pursuant to an Inquiry Received From That Individual or From a Third Party on His or Her Behalf We will disclose information under this routine use only in situations in which an individual may contact the Office of the President, seeking that Office's assistance in a matter relating to the *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File.* Information will be disclosed when the Office of the President makes an inquiry and indicates that it is acting on behalf of the individual whose record is requested. 2. To a Congressional Office in Response to An Inquiry From That Office Made at the Request of the Subject of a Record We will disclose information under this routine use only in situations in which the individual may ask his or her congressional representative to intercede in a matter relating to the *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File.* Information will be disclosed when the congressional representative makes an inquiry and indicates that he or she is acting on behalf of the individual whose record is requested. 3. To the Internal Revenue Service and to State and Local Government Tax Agencies in Response to Inquiries Regarding Receipt of Fees Paid in Any Calendar Year We will disclose information under this routine use to the Internal Revenue Service

(IRS)and to State and local government tax agencies, as necessary, regarding fees paid directly by SSA beginning calendar year 2007 and subsequent taxable years, as well as any other relevant and necessary information regarding fees paid to the qualified claimant representatives as appropriate. 4. To the Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, for the Purpose of Auditing Social Security Administration's Compliance With the Safeguard Provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as Amended This proposed routine use would allow the IRS to audit SSA's maintenance of earnings and wage information in the Attorney/EDPNA 1099-/MISC File to ensure that SSA complies with the safeguard requirements of the IRC. 5. To the Department of Justice (DOJ), a Court, or Other Tribunal, or Other Party Before Such Tribunal When

(a)Social Security Administration (SSA), or any component thereof; or

(b)any SSA employee in his/her official capacity; or

(c)any SSA employee in his/her individual capacity where DOJ (or SSA where it is authorized to do so) has agreed to represent the employee; or

(d)the United States, or any agency thereof, where SSA determines that the litigation is likely to affect the operations of SSA or any of its components is a party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and SSA determines that the use of such records by DOJ, a court, or other tribunal is relevant and necessary to the litigation, provided, however, that in each case, SSA determines that such disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the records were collected. We will disclose information under this routine use only as necessary to enable DOJ to effectively represent or defend SSA, its components or employees in litigation involving the proposed system of records or when the United States is a party to litigation and SSA has an interest in the litigation. 6. To the Department of Justice for

(a)investigating and prosecuting violations of the Social Security Act to which criminal penalties attach;

(b)representing the Commissioner; or

(c)investigating issues of fraud or violation of civil rights by agency officers or employees. We will disclose information under this routine use only as necessary to enable DOJ to represent SSA in matters concerning violations of the Social Security Act, to represent the Commissioner of Social Security, or to investigate issues of fraud or violations of civil rights by SSA officers or employees. 7. To Contractors and Other Federal Agencies, as Necessary, for the Purpose of Assisting Social Security Administration

(SSA)in the Efficient Administration of Its Programs. We Will Disclose Information Under This Routine Use Only in Situations in Which SSA May Enter a Contractual or Similar Agreement With a Third Party To Assist in Accomplishing an Agency Function Relating to This System of Records SSA occasionally contracts out certain of its functions when this would contribute to effective and efficient operations. For example, this may include contractors, as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 3718, or Federal agencies that either operate debt collection centers or that will assist SSA in collecting debts through Federal salary, administrative, and tax refund offset as provided by 5 U.S.C. 3716 and 3720A. The debts collected will only include those owed by claimants' representatives arising out of excess or erroneous representational fee payments made by SSA. SSA must be able to give a contractor or Federal agency whatever information SSA can legally provide in order for the contractor or Federal agency to fulfill its duties. In situations in which we use contractors, safeguards are provided in the contract prohibiting the contractor from using or disclosing the information for any purpose other than that described in the contract. 8. To Student Volunteers, Individuals Working Under a Personal Services Contract, and Other Workers Who Technically Do Not Have the Status of Federal Employees, When They Are Performing Work for the Social Security Administration (SSA), as Authorized by Law, and They Need Access to Personally Identifiable Information in SSA Records in Order To Perform Their Assigned Duties Under certain Federal statutes, SSA is authorized to use the service of volunteers and participants in certain educational, training, employment and community service programs. An example of such statutes and programs includes: 5 U.S.C. 2753 regarding the College Work-Study Program. We will disclose information under this routine use only when SSA uses the services of these individuals, and they need access to information in this system to perform their assigned agency duties. 9. To Federal, State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies and Private Security Contractors as Appropriate, Information Necessary • To enable them to protect the safety of Social Security Administration

(SSA)employees and customers, the security of the SSA workplace and the operation of SSA facilities; or • To assist investigations or prosecutions with respect to activities that affect such safety and security or activities that disrupts the operation of SSA facilities. We will disclose information under this routine use to law enforcement agencies and private security contractors when information is needed to respond to, investigate, or prevent activities that jeopardize the security and safety of SSA customers, employees or workplaces or that otherwise disrupt the operation of SSA facilities. Information would also be disclosed to assist in the prosecution of persons charged with violating Federal or local law in connection with such activities. 10. To the General Services Administration and the National Archives and Records Administration

(NARA)Under 44 U.S.C. 2904 and § 2906, as Amended by the NARA Act of 1984, Information Which Is Not Restricted From Disclosure by Federal Law for the Use of Those Agencies in Conducting Records Management Studies The Administrator of the General Services Administration

(GSA)and the Archivist of NARA are charged by 44 U.S.C. 2904 with promulgating standards, procedures and guidelines regarding record management and conducting records management studies. 44 U.S.C. 2906, as amended, provides that GSA and NARA are to have access to federal agencies' records and that agencies are to cooperate with GSA and NARA. In carrying out these responsibilities, it may be necessary for GSA and NARA to have access to this proposed system of records. In such instances, the routine use will facilitate disclosure. 11. To Employers To Assist the Social Security Administration

(SSA)in the Collection of Debts Owed by Claimants' Representatives Who Received an Excess or Erroneous Representational Fee Payment and Owe a Delinquent Debt to SSA. Disclosure Under This Routine Use Is Authorized Under the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 104-134) and Implemented Through Administrative Wage Garnishment Provisions of This Act. See 31 U.S.C. 3720D SSA is obligated to attempt to collect debts owed to it. Under 31 U.S.C. 3720D, implemented by SSA regulations (see 20 CFR Part 22, Subpart E), SSA may issue administrative wage garnishment orders to the employers of persons who owe debts to SSA. SSA will only provide employers with the minimal information necessary to allow employers to comply with our orders. 12. To Employers of Claimants' Representatives (e.g., Law Firms, Partnerships or Other Business Entities) in Accordance With the Requirements of Sections 6041 and 6045(f) of the Internal Revenue Code as Implemented by the IRS Regulations Found at 26 CFR 1.6041-1, and as Necessary To Carry Out the Attorney/EDPNA Fee Reporting Program We will disclose information under this routine use to employers of claimants' representatives in accordance with the requirements of sections 6041 and 6045(f) of the Internal Revenue Code as implemented by IRS regulations found at 26 CFR 1.6041-1, with respect to issuance of 1099-MISC information return forms. SSA will only provide employers with a copy of the 1099-MISC issued to the employee. B. Compatibility of Proposed Routine Uses The Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3)) and our disclosure regulations (20 CFR Part 401) permit us to disclose information under a published routine use for a purpose that is compatible with the purpose for which we collected the information. SSA's regulations at 20 CFR 401.150(c) permit us to disclose information under a routine use where necessary to carry out SSA programs. SSA's regulations at 20 CFR 401.120 provide that we will disclose information when a law specifically requires the disclosure. The proposed routine uses numbered 1 through 9, 11 and 12 above, will ensure efficient performance of our functions relating to the purpose and administration of the proposed *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File;* the disclosures that would be made under routine use number 10 are required by Federal law. The proposed routine uses are appropriate and meet the relevant statutory and regulatory criteria. III. Disclosure to Consumer Reporting Agencies The Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(12)), permits Federal agencies to disclose certain information to consumer reporting agencies in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3711(e) without the consent of the individuals to whom the information pertains. The purpose of this disclosure is to provide an incentive for individuals to pay any outstanding debts they owe to the Federal government by including information about these debts in the records that are identified in the records relating to those persons maintained by consumer reporting agencies. This is a practice commonly used by the private sector. The information disclosed will be limited to that needed to establish the identity of the individual debtor, the amount, status, and history of the debt; and the agency or program under which the debt arose. We have added the following statement at the end of the routine uses section of the proposed system of records: *Disclosure pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(12) may be made to consumer reporting agencies as defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. § 1681a(f)) or the Federal Claims Collection Act of 1966 (31 U.S.C. § 3701, et seq.), as amended. The disclosure will be made in accordance with 31 U.S.C. § 3711(e). The purpose of this disclosure is to aid in the collection of outstanding debts owed to the Federal government, typically, to provide an incentive for debtors to repay delinquent Federal government debts by making these debts part of their credit records. The information to be disclosed is limited to the individual's name, address, SSN, and other information necessary to establish the individual's identity, the amount, status, and history of the debt; and the agency or program under which the debt arose.* IV. Records Storage Medium and Safeguards for the Proposed Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File System of Records *The Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* is a repository for records in paper and electronic form. Only authorized SSA personnel who have a need for the information in the performance of their official duties will be permitted access to the information. We will safeguard the security of the information by requiring the use of access codes to enter the computer systems that will maintain the data, and will store computerized records in secured areas that are accessible only to employees who require the information to perform their official duties. Safeguards include a lock/unlock password system, exclusive use of leased telephone lines, a terminal-oriented transaction matrix, and an audit trail. Any manually maintained records will be kept in locked cabinets or in otherwise secure areas. Furthermore, SSA employees having access to SSA databases maintaining personal information must sign a sanction document annually, acknowledging their accountability for making unauthorized access to or disclosure of such information. Contractor personnel having access to data in the proposed *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* will be required to adhere to SSA rules concerning safeguards, access and use of the data. SSA personnel having access to the data on this system will be informed of the criminal penalties provided in the Privacy Act and other statutes for unauthorized access to or disclosure of information maintained in this system. See 5 U.S.C. 552a(i)(1). VI. Effect of the Proposed Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File System of Records on the Rights of Individuals The proposed *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* system of records will maintain only that information that is necessary for the efficient and effective: • Verification and issuance of 1099-MISC information returns to representatives who receive direct fee payments; • Issuance of 1099-MISC information returns to employers of claimants' representatives; • Reporting required by the IRC; and • Collection or reporting of delinquent debts that might arise from payments made to representatives. Security measures will be employed that protect access to and preclude unauthorized disclosure of records in the proposed system of records. Therefore, we do not anticipate that the proposed system of records will have any unwarranted adverse effect on the rights of individuals. Dated: July 18, 2006. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner. Social Security Administration Notice of System of Records Required by the Privacy Act of 1974 60-0325 System name: Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File, Social Security Administration (SSA), Deputy Commissioner for Budget, Finance and Management Security classification: None. System location: The *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* is established when claimants' representatives who are eligible to receive direct fee payments file a request for direct payment through the internet, by mail, or in person and the information is maintained in the National Computer Center at SSA Headquarters. The computerized records and database are maintained at the Social Security Administration, Office of Systems, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235. Categories of individuals covered by the system: This system covers only claimants' representatives who are eligible to receive direct payment of representational fees for representing SSA claimants at the administrative or court level in SSA-related matters. Categories of records in the system: The *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* will maintain the following information: Names of representatives eligible to receive direct fee payments, taxpayer identification numbers (TIN)/Social Security numbers (SSN), tax mailing address, notice/payment address, type of representative ( *e.g.* , Attorney or EDPNA), tax identification number, court-standing information, sanction-related information ( *e.g.* , “Disqualified or Suspended,” and start/stop date of sanction), signature date on the Appointment of Representative (Form SSA-1696-U4) or equivalent written statement, termination of service date, business affiliation information ( *e.g.* , sole proprietor or single-member Limited Liability Company/Limited Liability Partnership; or partner or salaried employee), telephone/fax numbers, name and address of entity ( *e.g.* , Firm, Other), EIN of entity, business affiliations, and direct deposit information. The system will also contain relevant claimants' SSNs. Authority for maintenance of the system: Sections 205, 206, 1631(d)(1) and 1631(d)(2) of the Act, as amended, and Sections 6041 and 6045 of the Internal Revenue Code (26 CFR Part 1). Purpose(s): The *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* will ensure appropriate and efficient collection, maintenance and issuance of 1099-MISC information returns to representatives eligible to receive direct fee payments for services rendered to claimants in proceedings before SSA or a Federal court. The file will also ensure issuance of 1099-MISC information returns to employers of claimants' representatives when information about the employer is known. The information is used throughout SSA for the purpose of verifying, documenting, and organizing the information for reporting purposes. The file will also be used in determining whether representatives owe SSA a debt based on an excess or erroneous fee payment and to assist SSA in its representative sanction and debt collection process. The *Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC File* may also be used for quality review, evaluation, and measurement studies, and other statistical and research purposes. Extracts may be maintained as interviewing tools, activity logs, records of claims clearance, and records of type or nature of actions taken. Routine uses of records maintained in the system, including categories of users and the purposes of such uses: Disclosures may be made for routine uses as indicated below. However, any information defined as “return or return information” under 26 U.S.C. 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code

(IRC)will not be disclosed unless authorized by the IRC, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), or IRS regulations: 1. To the Office of the President for the purpose of responding to an individual pursuant to an inquiry received from that individual or from a third party on his/her behalf. 2. To a congressional office in response to an inquiry from that office made at the request of the subject of the record. 3. To the Internal Revenue Service and to State and local government tax agencies in response to inquiries regarding receipt of fees paid directly by SSA in calendar year 2007 and continuing. 4. To the Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, for the purpose of auditing Social Security Administration's compliance with the safeguard provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. 5. To the Department of Justice, a court, or other tribunal, or other party before such tribunal when:

(a)Social Security Administration, or any component thereof;

(b)Any SSA employee in his/her official capacity;

(c)Any SSA employee in his/her individual capacity where DOJ (or SSA where it is authorized to do so) has agreed to represent the employee; or

(d)The United States, or any agency thereof, where SSA determines that the litigation is likely to affect the operations of SSA or any of its components is a party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and SSA determines that the use of such records by DOJ, a court, or other tribunal is relevant and necessary to the litigation, provided, however, that in each case, SSA determines that such disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the records were collected. 6. To Department of Justice for:

(a)Investigating and prosecuting violations of the Social Security Act to which criminal penalties attach;

(b)Representing the Commissioner; or

(c)Investigating issues of fraud or violation of civil rights by agency officers or employees. 7. To contractors and other Federal agencies, as necessary, for the purpose of assisting SSA in the efficient administration of its programs. We will disclose information under this routine use only in situations in which SSA may enter a contractual or similar agreement with a third party to assist in accomplishing an agency function relating to this system of records. 8. To student volunteers, individuals working under a personal services contract, and other workers who technically do not have the status of Federal employees, when they are performing work for the Social Security Administration (SSA), as authorized by law, and they need access to personally identifiable information in SSA records in order to perform their assigned duties. 9. To Federal, State and local law enforcement agencies and private security contractors as appropriate, information necessary: • To enable them to protect the safety of Social Security Administration employees and customers, the security of the SSA workplace and the operation of SSA facilities; or • To assist in investigations or prosecutions with respect to activities that affect such safety and security or activities that disrupts the operation of SSA facilities. 10. To the General Services Administration and the National Archives and Records Administration under 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906, as amended by the NARA Act of 1984, information which is not restricted from disclosure by Federal law for use by those agencies in conducting records management studies. 11. To employers to assist the Social Security Administration

(SSA)in the collection of debts owed by claimants' representatives who received an excess or erroneous representational fee payment and owe a delinquent debt to SSA. Disclosure under this routine use is authorized under the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 104-134) and implemented through administrative wage garnishment provisions of this Act (31 U.S.C. 3720D). 12. To employers of claimants' representatives ( *e.g.* , firms, partnerships or other business entities) in accordance with the requirements of sections 6041 and 6045(f) of the Internal Revenue Code as implemented by IRS regulations found at 26 CFR 1.6041-1, and as necessary to carry out the Attorney/EDPNA Fee reporting program. Disclosure to Consumer Reporting Agencies: Disclosure pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(12) may be made to consumer reporting agencies as defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a(f)) or the Federal Claims Collection Act of 1966 (31 U.S.C. 3701, *et seq.* ), as amended. The disclosure will be made in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3711(e). The purpose of this disclosure is to aid in the collection of outstanding debts owed to the Federal government, typically, to provide an incentive for debtors to repay those delinquent debts by making the debts part of their credit records. The information to be disclosed is limited to the individual's name, address, SSN, and other information necessary to establish the individual's identity; the amount, status, and history of the debt; and the agency or program under which the debt arose. Extended Use of Taxpayer Identification Numbers/Social Security Numbers: Under the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, 31 U.S.C. 7701, each Federal agency must require all persons doing business with that Federal agency to provide their TINs/SSNs. A person is considered to be “doing business” with an agency if the agency assesses a fee on the person. Under sections 206(d) and 1631(d)(2)(C) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 406(d) and 1383(d)(2)(C)), SSA assesses a fee each time it directly pays a representational fee to a claimant's representative. Further, the representational fees that SSA directly pays to representatives are funds withheld from benefit payments that are redirected to the representatives from claimants. Therefore, SSA is “doing business” with all representatives to whom it pays fees. Pursuant to the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, 31 U.S.C. 7701(c)(3), SSA gives notice that it intends to use the TINs/SSNs for the purpose of collecting or reporting any delinquent debts that arise out of the representational fee payments that SSA makes to representatives. SSA will only disclose TINs/SSNs when necessary to facilitate debt collection or reporting as indicated by Federal statute or regulation. Policies and practices for storing, retrieving, accessing, retaining and disposing of records in the system: Storage: Records are maintained in both electronic and paper form. Retrievability: Records are retrieved by SSN or alphabetically by the representative's name. Safeguards: Attorney/EDPNA 1099-MISC files are protected through limited access to SSA records. Access to the records is limited to those employees who require such access in the performance of their official duties. All employees are instructed about SSA confidentiality rules as part of their initial orientation training. Safeguards for automated records have been established in accordance with the Systems Security Handbook. For computerized records electronically transmitted between SSA's central office and field office locations (including organizations administering SSA programs under contractual agreements), safeguards include a lock/unlock password system, exclusive use of leased telephone lines, a terminal-oriented transaction matrix, and an audit trail. Access *http://www.ssa.gov/foia/bluebook/app_g.htm* for additional information regarding the safeguards SSA employs to protect its paper and automated records. Retention and disposal: The information contained in the Attorney and Eligible Direct Pay Non-Attorney (EDPNA) 1099-MISC File will be retained for 3 years. An SF-115, Request for Records Disposition Authority must be written and presented to the National Archives and Records Administration for approval since there are no existing schedules that cover these records. None of the information contained in this database may be destroyed/deleted prior to the approval of the disposition schedule. All records must be definitively destroyed in accordance with their appropriate retention schedules. System manager(s) and address: Deputy Commissioner for Budget, Finance and Management, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235. Notification procedure(s): An individual can determine if this system contains a record about him/her by writing to the system manager(s) at the above address and providing his/her name, SSN or other information that may be in the system of records that will identify him/her. An individual requesting notification of records in person should provide the same information, as well as an identity document, preferably with a photograph, such as a driver's license or some other means of identification. If an individual does not have any identification document sufficient to establish his/her identity, the individual must certify in writing that he/she is the person claimed to be and that he/she understands that the knowing and willful request for, or acquisition of, a record pertaining to another individual under false pretenses is a criminal offense. If notification is requested by telephone, an individual must verify his/her identity by providing identifying information that parallels information in the record to which notification is being requested. If it is determined that the identifying information provided by telephone is insufficient, the individual will be required to submit a request in writing or in person. If an individual is requesting information by telephone on behalf of another individual, the subject individual must be connected with SSA and the requesting individual in the same phone call. SSA will establish the subject individual's identity (his/her name, SSN, address, date of birth, and place of birth, along with one other piece of information such as mother's maiden name) and ask for his/her consent to providing information to the requesting individual. If a request for notification is submitted by mail, the representative must include a notarized statement to SSA to verify his/her identity or must certify in the request that he/she is the person claimed to be and that he/she understands that the knowing and willful request for, or acquisition of, a record pertaining to another individual under false pretenses is a criminal offense. These procedures are in accordance with SSA regulations (20 CFR 401.40(c)). Record access procedure(s): Same as Notification procedures. Requesters also should reasonably specify the record contents they are seeking. These procedures are in accordance with SSA regulations (20 CFR 401.40(c)). Contesting record procedure(s): Same as Notification procedures. Requesters also should reasonably identify the record, specify the information they are contesting, and state the corrective action sought and the reasons for the correction with supporting justification showing how the record is untimely, incomplete, inaccurate, or irrelevant. These procedures are in accordance with SSA regulations (20 CFR 401.65(a)). Record source categories: Information in this system of records is obtained from claimant representatives or SSA records ( *e.g.* , the Master Beneficiary Record, Supplemental Security Income Record, Numident Record). Systems exempted from certain provisions of the Privacy Act: None. [FR Doc. E6-11784 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4191-02-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Highway in Rhode Island AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of Limitation on Claims for Judicial Review of Actions by FHWA and Other Federal Agencies. SUMMARY: This notice announces actions taken by FHWA and other Federal agencies that are final within the meaning of 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1). The actions relate to a proposed highway project, Improvements to the U.S. Route 6/Route 10 Interchange in Providence County in the State of Rhode Island. Those actions grant licenses, permits, and approvals for the project. DATES: By this notice, the FHWA is advising the public of final agency actions subject to 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1). A claim seeking judicial review of the Federal agency actions on the highway project will be barred unless the claim is filed on or before January 25, 2007. If the Federal law that authorizes judicial review of a claim provides a time period of less than 180 days for filing such claim, then that shorter time period still applies. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Lucy Garliauskas, Division Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, 380 Westminster Mall, Providence, Rhode Island 02903; e-mail: *Lucy.Garliauskas@fhwa.dot.gov* ; telephone:

(401)528-4544. The FHWA Rhode Island Division Office's normal business hours are 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. (Eastern Time). You may also contact Mr. Edmund T. Parker, Jr., P.E., Rhode Island Department of Transportation, Two Capitol Hill, Providence, Rhode Island 02903; telephone:

(401)222-2023, extension 4100. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the FHWA and other Federal agencies have taken final agency actions by issuing licenses, permits, and approvals for the following highway project in the State of Rhode Island: Improvements to the U.S. Route 6/Route 10 Interchange in Providence County. The project would involve reconstruction of the U.S. Route 6/Route 10 Interchange on new location, construction of new bridges, and completing all movements of the interchange. The project would include U.S. Route 6 from approximately 1000 feet west of the Hartford Avenue Interchange easterly to Atwells Avenue, and Rhode Island State Route 10 from the Cranston Viaduct to U.S. Route 6. The actions by the Federal agencies, and the laws under which such actions were taken, are described in the Final Environmental Impact Statement

(FEIS)for the project, approved on December 5, 2005, in the FHWA Record for Decision

(ROD)issued on June 9, 2006, and in other documents in the FHWA, administrative record. The FEIS, ROD, and other documents in the FHWA administrative record file are available by contacting the FHWA or the Rhode Island Department of Transportation at the addresses provided above. The FEIS and ROD can be viewed and downloaded from the project Web site at *http://www.dot.state.ri.us/* or viewed at public libraries in the project area. This notice applies to all Federal agency decisions as of the issuance date of this notice and all laws under which such actions were taken, including but not limited to: 1. *General:* National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)[42 U.S.C. 4321-4351]; Federal-Aid Highway Act [23 U.S.C. 109]. 2. *Air:* Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671(q). 3. *Land:* Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 [49 U.S.C. 3031. 4. *Wildlife:* Endangered Species Act [16 U.S.C. 1531-1544 and Section 1536], Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act [16 U.S.C. 661-667(d)]. 5. *Historic and Cultural Resources:* Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended [16 U.S.C. 470(f) *et seq.* ]; Archeological Resources Protection Act of 1977 [16 U.S.C. 470(aa)-11]; Archeological and Historic Preservation Act [16 U.S.C. 469-469(c)]. 6. *Social and Economic:* Civil Rights Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C. 2000(d)-2000(d)(1)]; Farmland Protection Policy Act

(FPPA)[7 U.S.C. 4201-4209]. 7. *Wetlands and Water Resources:* Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251-1377 (Section 404, Section 401, Section 319); Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 42 U.S.C. 300(f)-300(j)(6); Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, 33 U.S.C. 401-406; Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. 1271-1287; Emergency Wetlands Resources Act, 16 U.S.C. 3921, 3931; TEA-21 Wetlands Mitigation, 23 U.S.C. 103(b)(6)(m) 133(b)(11); Flood Disaster Protection Act, 42 U.S.C. 4001-4128. 8. *Executive Orders:* E.O. 11990 Protection of Wetlands; E.O. 11988 Floodplain Management; E.O. 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations; E.O. 11593 Protection and Enhancement of Cultural Resources; E.O. 13007 Indian Sacred Sites; E.O. 13287 Preserve America; E.O. 13175 Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities apply to this program.) Authority: 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1). Issued on: July 28, 2006. Lucy Garliauskas, Division Administrator, Rhode Island Division, Federal Highway Administration. [FR Doc. 06-6439 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 41

Traces to 41 documents

CFR