Notices. Notice of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of public comment

49,610 words·~226 min read·/register/2006/08/07/06-6735·

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

BILLING CODE 6055-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of public comment. SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the following proposal for the collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. 1. *Type of submission, new, revision, or extension:* Revision. 2. *The title of the information collection:* “Nuclear Material Events Database (NMED)” for the Collection of Event Report, Response, Analyses, and Follow-up Data on Events Involving the Use of Atomic Energy Act

(AEA)Radioactive Byproduct Material. 3. *The form number if applicable:* N/A. 4. *How often the collection is required:* Agreement States are requested to provide copies of licensee material event reports electronically or by hard copy to NRC on a monthly basis or within 30 days of receipt from their licensee. In addition, Agreement States are requested to report events that may pose a significant health and safety hazard to the NRC Headquarters Operations Officer within the next working day of notification by an Agreement State licensee. 5. *Who will be required or asked to report:* Current Agreement States and any State receiving Agreement State status in the future. 6. *An estimate of the number of responses:* 741. 7. *The estimated number of annual respondents:* 34. 8. *An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request:* 756 hours, an average of approximately 1.0 hour per response for 711 events and 1.5 additional hours for 30 significant events, for all existing Agreement State reporting. Any new Agreement State would add approximately 21 event reports (including follow-up reports) per year or 22.5 burden hours. 9. *An indication of whether Section 3507(d), Pub. L. 104-13 applies:* Not applicable. 10. *Abstract:* NRC regulations require NRC licensees to report incidents and events involving the use, transportation and security of radioactive byproduct material, and source material, such as those involving radiation overexposures, leaking or contaminated sealed source(s), release of excessive contamination of radioactive material, lost or stolen radioactive material, equipment failures, abandoned well logging sources and medical events. Agreement State licenses are also required to report these events to their individual Agreement State regulatory authorities under compatible Agreement State regulations. NRC is requesting that the Agreement States provide information to NRC on the initial notification, response actions, and follow-up investigations on events involving the use (including suspected theft or terrorist activities) of nuclear materials regulated pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act. The event information should be provided in a uniform electronic format, for assessment and identification of any facilities/site specific or generic safety concerns that could have the potential to impact public health and safety. The identification and review of safety concerns may result in lessons learned, and may also identify generic issues for further study which could result in proposals for changes or revisions to technical or regulatory designs, processes, standards, guidance or requirements. Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer listed below by September 6, 2006. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received after this date. John A. Asalone, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0178), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. Comments can also be e-mailed to *John_A._Asalone@omb.eop.gov* or submitted by telephone at

(202)395-4650. The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo Shelton, 301-415-7233. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day of August 2006. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Brenda Jo Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information Services. [FR Doc. E6-12723 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287] Duke Power Company LLC, Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, the Commission) has granted the request of Duke Power Company LLC (the licensee) to withdraw its February 14, 2005, application for proposed amendments to Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55 for Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, respectively, located in Oconee County. The proposed amendments would have revised the Technical Specifications to accommodate the replacement of the current analog-based reactor protective system

(RPS)and engineered safeguards protective system

(ESPS)with a digital computer-based RPS and ESPS. The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment published in the **Federal Register** on March 16, 2005 (70 FR 12907). However, by letter dated June 22, 2006, the licensee withdrew the proposed change. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendments dated February 14, 2005, and the licensee's letter dated June 22, 2006, which withdrew the application for license amendments. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (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 24th day of July 2006. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Leonard N. Olshan, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E6-12725 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-255] Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License and Opportunity for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-20, issued to Nuclear Management Company (the licensee), for operation of the Palisades Plant located in Van Buren County, Michigan. The proposed amendment would remove tri-sodium phosphate from the Palisades' containment. 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. 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” in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available 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 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/requestor 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 must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include 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. Non-timely 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(a)(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 Jonathan Rogoff, Esquire, Vice President, Counsel & Secretary, Nuclear Management Company, LLC, 700 First Street, Hudson, WI 54016, attorney for the licensee. If a request for a hearing is received, the Commission's staff may issue the amendment after it completes its technical review and prior to the completion of any required hearing if it publishes a further notice for public comment of its proposed finding of no significant hazards consideration in accordance with 10 CFR 50.91 and 50.92. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated March 20, 2006, which is available for public inspection 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 electronically from the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html* . Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of July 2006. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Peter S. Tam, Acting Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E6-12724 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE Determination Regarding Waiver of Discriminatory Purchasing Requirements With Respect to Goods and Services Covered by Chapter 9 of the United States-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Determination under Trade Agreements Act of 1979. EFFECTIVE DATES: August 7, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean Heilman Grier, Senior Procurement Negotiator, Office of the United States Trade Representative,

(202)395-9476, or Jason Kearns, Associate General Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative,

(202)395-9439. On September 14, 2004, the United States and Bahrain entered into the United States-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement (“Bahrain FTA”). Chapter 9 of the Bahrain FTA sets forth certain obligations with respect to government procurement of goods and services, as specified in Annexes 9-A-1 and 9-A-2 of the Bahrain FTA. On January 11, 2006, the President signed into law the United States-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (“the Bahrain FTA Act”) (Pub. L. 109-169, 119 Stat. 3581) (19 U.S.C. 3805 note). In section 101(a) of the Bahrain FTA Act, the Congress approved the Bahrain FTA. The Bahrain FTA entered into force on August 1, 2006. Section 1-201 of Executive Order 12260 of December 31, 1980 (46 FR 1653) delegates the functions of the President under Sections 301 and 302 of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (“the Trade Agreements Act”) (19 U.S.C. 2511, 2512) to the United States Trade Representative. Now, therefore, I, Susan C. Schwab, United States Trade Representative, in conformity with the provisions of Sections 301 and 302 of the Trade Agreements Act, and Executive Order 12260, and in order to carry out U.S. obligations under Chapter 9 of the Bahrain FTA, do hereby determine that: 1. Bahrain is a country, other than a major industrialized country, which, pursuant to the Bahrain FTA, will provide appropriate reciprocal competitive government procurement opportunities to United States products and suppliers of such products. In accordance with Section 301(b)(3) of the Trade Agreements Act, Bahrain is so designated for purposes of Section 301(a) of the Trade Agreements Act. 2. With respect to eligible products of Bahrain ( *i.e.* , goods and services covered by the Schedules of the United States in Annexes 9-A-1 and 9-A-2 of the Bahrain FTA) and suppliers of such products, the application of any law, regulation, procedure, or practice regarding government procurement that would, if applied to such products and suppliers, result in treatment less favorable than accorded—

(A)To United States products and suppliers of such products; or

(B)To eligible products of another foreign country or instrumentality which is a party to the Agreement on Government Procurement referred to in section 101(d)(17) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3511(d)(17)) and suppliers of such products, shall be waived. With respect to Bahrain, this waiver shall be applied by all entities listed in the Schedules of the United States in Annex 9-A-1 and in List A of Annex 9-A-2 of the Bahrain FTA. 3. The designation in paragraph 1 and the waiver in paragraph 2 are subject to modification or withdrawal by the United States Trade Representative. Susan C. Schwab, United States Trade Representative. [FR Doc. E6-12792 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190-W6-P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE [Docket No. WTO/DS345] WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding United States—Customs Bond Directive for Merchandise Subject to Anti-Dumping/Countervailing Duties AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Notice; request for comments. SUMMARY: The Office of the United States Trade Representative (“USTR”) is providing notice that on June 6, 2006, India requested consultations with the United States under the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (“WTO Agreement”) concerning certain issues relating to Customs Bond Directive 99-3510-004, as amended by the Amendment to Bond Directive 99-3510-004 (July 9, 2004), and clarifications and amendments thereof. That request may be found at *http://www.wto.org* contained in a document designated as WT/DS345/1. USTR invites written comments from the public concerning the issues raised in this dispute. DATES: Although USTR will accept any comments received during the course of the dispute settlement proceedings, comments should be submitted on or before August 18, 2006 to be assured of timely consideration by USTR. ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted

(i)electronically, to *FR0624@ustr.eop.gov,* Attn: “India Bond Dispute (DS345)” in the subject line, or

(ii)by fax, to Sandy McKinzy at

(202)395-3640. For documents sent by fax, USTR requests that the submitter provide a confirmation copy to the electronic mail address listed above. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elissa Alben, Assistant General Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508,

(202)395-9622. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: USTR is providing notice that consultations have been requested pursuant to the WTO *Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes* (“DSU”). If such consultations should fail to resolve the matter and a dispute settlement panel is established pursuant to the DSU, such panel, which would hold its meetings in Geneva, Switzerland, would be expected to issue a report on its findings and recommendations within six to nine months after it is established. Major Issues Raised by India On August 4, 2004, the Department of Commerce published in the **Federal Register** notice of its affirmative preliminary less-than-fair-value (“LTFV”) determination in an investigation concerning certain frozen and canned warm water shrimp from India (69 FR 47,111). On December 23, 2004, the Department of Commerce published notice of its affirmative final LTFV determination (69 FR 76,916), and on February 1, 2005, the Department of Commerce published an amended final LTFV determination, along with an antidumping duty order, covering only certain frozen warm water shrimp from India (70 FR 5147). The latter notice contains the final margins of LTFV sales, as provided in section 733 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended. In its request for consultations, India alleges that the United States has imposed on importers a requirement to maintain a continuous entry bond in the amount of the anti-dumping duty margin multiplied by the value of imports of frozen warmwater shrimp imported by the importer in the preceding year, and that Customs Bond Directive 99-3510-004, as amended on July 9, 2004 (and any clarifications and amendments thereof) as such constitutes specific action against dumping and subsidization not in accordance with GATT 1994 Article VI:2 and 3, as well as Articles 1, and 18.1 of the AD Agreement and Articles 10 and 32.1 of the Subsidies Agreement, that it results in charges in excess of the margin of dumping or amount of subsidy that are not in accordance with GATT 1994 Articles VI:2 and VI:3, and that it is unreasonable as security for payment of antidumping and countervailing duties and therefore inconsistent with Note Ad paragraphs 2 and 3 of GATT 1994 Article VI. India further alleges that the continuous bond requirement as such is inconsistent with Articles 7.1, 7.2, 7.4, and 7.5 of the AD Agreement and Articles 17.1, 17.2, 17.4, and 17.5 of the Subsidies Agreement to the extent that it may be characterized as a provisional measure or is applied prior to the imposition of definitive antidumping duties, and that it is inconsistent with Articles 9.2 and 9.3 of the AD Agreement and Articles 19.3 and 19.4 of the Subsidies Agreement. India further states that because the amended directive was not published in the **Federal Register** or the Customs Bulletin of the United States, it is inconsistent with GATT 1994 Article X, AD Agreement Article 18.5, and Subsidies Agreement Article 32.5. India alleges that the measure as such is inconsistent with GATT 1994 Article I and II as a charge in excess of that imposed or mandatorily required by legislation on the date of entry into force of the GATT, and that it is inconsistent with GATT 1994 Article XI as a restriction other than a duty, tax or other charge and GATT 1994 Article XIII to the extent it is applied in a discriminatory manner. India also states that the application of the continuous bond requirement to imports of frozen warmwater shrimp from India is inconsistent with Articles I, II, VI:2 (including Note 1 *Ad* Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article VI) XI, and XIII of the GATT, and Articles 1, 7.1, 7.2, 7.4, 7.5, 9.2, 9.3, 9.3.1 and 18.1 of the AD Agreement. Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning the issues raised in this dispute. Persons may submit their comments either

(i)electronically, to *FR0624@ustr.eop.gov,* Attn: “India Bond Dispute (DS345)” in the subject line, or

(ii)by fax to Sandy McKinzy at

(202)395-3640. For documents sent by fax, USTR requests that the submitter provide a confirmation copy to the electronic mail address listed above. USTR encourages the submission of documents in Adobe PDF format, as attachments to an electronic mail. Interested persons who make submissions by electronic mail should not provide separate cover letters; information that might appear in a cover letter should be included in the submission itself. Similarly, to the extent possible, any attachments to the submission should be included in the same file as the submission itself, and not as separate files. A person requesting that information contained in a comment submitted by that person be treated as confidential business information must certify that such information is business confidential and would not customarily be released to the public by the submitter. Confidential business information must be clearly designated as such and the submission must be marked “BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL” at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page. Information or advice contained in a comment submitted, other than business confidential information, may be determined by USTR to be confidential in accordance with section 135(g)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155(g)(2)). If the submitter believes that information or advice may qualify as such, the submitter—

(1)Must clearly so designate the information or advice;

(2)Must clearly mark the material as “SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE” at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page; and

(3)Is encouraged to provide a non-confidential summary of the information or advice. Pursuant to section 127(e) of the URAA (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR will maintain a file on this dispute settlement proceeding, accessible to the public, in the USTR Reading Room, which is located at 1724 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508. The public file will include non-confidential comments received by USTR from the public with respect to the dispute; if a dispute settlement panel is convened, the U.S. submissions to that panel, the submissions, or non-confidential summaries of submissions, to the panel received from other participants in the dispute, as well as the report of the panel; and, if applicable, the report of the Appellate Body. An appointment to review the public file (Docket No. WT/DS-345, India Bond Dispute) may be made by calling the USTR Reading Room at

(202)395-6186. The USTR Reading Room is open to the public from 9:30 a.m. to noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Daniel Brinza, Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and Enforcement. [FR Doc. E6-12788 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190-W6-P OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Review of a New Information Collection; OPM Form 1655 and OPM Form 1655-A AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-13, May 22, 1995), this notice announces that the Office of Personnel Management

(OPM)intends to submit to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)a request for review of a new information collection. OPM 1655, Application for Senior Administrative Law Judge, and OPM 1655-A, Geographic Preference Statement for Senior Administrative Law Judge Applicant, are used by retired Administrative Law Judges seeking reemployment on a temporary and intermittent basis to complete hearings of one or more specified case(s) in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946. Approximately 150 OPM 1655 are completed annually. Each form takes approximately 30-45 minutes to complete. The annual estimated burden is 94 hours. Approximately 200 OPM 1655-A are completed annually. Each form takes approximately 15-25 minutes to complete. The annual estimated burden is 67 hours. *Comments are particularly invited on:* • Whether this information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of OPM, and whether it will have practical utility; • Whether our estimates of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; • And ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. For copies of this proposal, contact Mary Beth Smith-Toomey on

(202)606-8358, Fax

(202)418-3251 or e-mail to *mbtoomey@opm.gov* . Please be sure to include a mailing address with your request. DATES: Comments on this proposal should be received within 60 calendar days from the date of this publication. ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments to—Juanita H. Love, Program Manager, Administrative Law Judge Program Office, Human Capital Leadership & Merit System, Accountability Division, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street, NW., Room 7425, Washington, DC 20415. For Information Regarding Administrative Coordination Contact: Karyn D. Lusby, Program Analyst, Administrative Law Judge Program Office, Human Capital Leadership & Merit System, Accountability Division, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street, NW., Room 7425, Washington, DC 20415, *karyn.lusby@opm.gov* . Office of Personnel Management. Dan G. Blair, Deputy Director. [FR Doc. E6-12784 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-43-P OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Excepted Service AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management (OPM). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This gives notice of OPM decisions granting authority to make appointments under Schedules A, B, and C in the excepted service as required by 5 CFR 6.6 and 213.103. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Guilford, Center for Leadership and Executive Resources Policy, Division for Strategic Human Resources Policy, 202-606-1391. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Appearing in the listing below are the individual authorities established under Schedules A, B, and C between June 1, 2006, and June 30, 2006. Future notices will be published on the fourth Tuesday of each month, or as soon as possible thereafter. A consolidated listing of all authorities as of June 30 is published each year. Schedule A No Schedule A appointments were approved for June 2006. Schedule B No Schedule B appointments were approved for June 2006. Schedule C The following Schedule C appointments were approved during June 2006: Section 213.3303 Executive Office of the President Council on Environmental Quality EQGS60019 Associate Director for Agriculture, Lands and Wildlife to the Chairman (Council on Environmental Quality). Effective June 30, 2006. Office of Management and Budget BOGS60157 Confidential Assistant to the Administrator, E-Government and Information Technology. Effective June 16, 2006. BOGS60011 Deputy General Counsel to the General Counsel. Effective June 19, 2006. BOGS60155 Special Assistant to the Director, Office of Management and Budget. Effective June 19, 2006. Office of National Drug Control Policy QQGS60091 Legislative Analyst to the Associate Director, Office of Legislative Affairs. Effective June 01, 2006. Office of Science and Technology Policy TSGS60030 Confidential Assistant to the Chief of Staff and General Counsel. Effective June 09, 2006. Section 213.3304 Department of State DSGS61092 Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs. Effective June 06, 2006. DSGS61096 Senior Advisor to the Director, Policy Planning Staff. Effective June 09, 2006. DSGS61095 Special Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Secretary. Effective June 13, 2006. DSGS61089 Supervisory Protocol Officer (Visits) to the Chief of Protocol. Effective June 15, 2006. DSGS61088 Special Assistant to the Chief Financial Officer. Effective June 16, 2006. DSGS61094 Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs. Effective June 16, 2006. DSGS60817 Legislative Management Officer to the Assistant Secretary for Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs. Effective June 19, 2006. DSGS61093 Public Affairs Officer to the Chief of Protocol. Effective June 26, 2006. DSGS61098 Legislative Analyst to the Assistant Secretary for Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs. Effective June 30, 2006. DSGS61100 Staff Assistant to the Ambassador-At-Large (War Crimes). Effective June 30, 2006. Section 213.3305 Department of the Treasury DYGS00442 Special Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Public Liaison, Strategic Planning and Business Development). Effective June 30, 2006. DYGS00472 Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for International Affairs. Effective June 30, 2006. Section 213.3306 Office of the Secretary of Defense DDGS16954 Special Assistant to the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Legal Affairs). Effective June 02, 2006. DDGS16946 Staff Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs). Effective June 09, 2006. DDGS16950 Confidential Assistant to the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and Technology). Effective June 13, 2006. DDGS16952 Special Administrative Assistant to the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics). Effective June 23, 2006. Section 213.3310 Department of Justice DJGS00126 Deputy Chief of Staff and Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General. Effective June 02, 2006. DJGS00155 Speechwriter to the Director, Office of Public Affairs. Effective June 09, 2006. DJGS00369 Deputy White House Liaison to the White House Liaison and Counsel to the Attorney General. Effective June 19, 2006. DJGS00147 Confidential Assistant to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources. Effective June 26, 2006. DJGS00124 Senior Counsel to the Director, Office of Public Affairs. Effective June 28, 2006. DJGS00226 Senior Advisor to the Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance. Effective June 28, 2006. DJGS00279 Deputy Director to the Director, Office of Intergovernmental and Public Liaison. Effective June 28, 2006. Section 213.3311 Department of Homeland Security DMGS00518 Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Information Analysis. Effective June 01, 2006. DMGS00531 Counselor to the General Counsel. Effective June 06, 2006. DMGS00535 Director of Communications for Preparedness to the Under Secretary for Preparedness. Effective June 09, 2006. DMGS00536 Director of Communications to the Deputy Director, Federal Emergency Management Agency. Effective June 09, 2006. DMGS00534 Associate Director of Strategic Communications for Policy to the Director of Strategic Communications. Effective June 13, 2006. DMGS00533 Advisor for Human Capital to the Under Secretary for Management. Effective June 16, 2006. DMGS00537 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy Development to the Assistant Secretary for Policy. Effective June 21, 2006. DMGS00515 Assistant Director of Legislative Affairs for Miscellaneous Offices to the Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs. Effective June 26, 2006. DMGS00532 Advisor to the Director for Policy to the Director, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. Effective June 28, 2006. DMGS00541 Director/Executive Secretariat, Private Sector Advisory Committee to the Executive Director, Homeland Security Advisory Committees. Effective June 30, 2006. DMGS00542 Advisor for Intelligence to the Assistant Secretary, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Effective June 30, 2006. Section 213.3312 Department of the Interior DIGS01071 Special Assistant to the Solicitor. Effective June 16, 2006. DIGS01072 Special Assistant—Scheduling and Advance to the Director—Scheduling and Advance. Effective June 30, 2006. Section 213.3313 Department of Agriculture DAGS00849 Confidential Assistant to the Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service. Effective June 21, 2006. DAGS00850 Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for Rural Development. Effective June 21, 2006. DAGS00851 Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for Research, Education and Economics. Effective June 21, 2006. DAGS00854 Staff Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations. Effective June 28, 2006. DAGS00853 Director, Native American Programs to the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations. Effective June 30, 2006. Section 213.3314 Department of Commerce DCGS00385 Senior Advisor to the Director. Effective June 09, 2006. DCGS00492 Confidential Assistant to the Director of Advance. Effective June 09, 2006. DCGS60205 Policy Advisor to the Chief of Staff. Effective June 09, 2006. DCGS60272 Confidential Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Market Access and Compliance. Effective June 09, 2006. DCGS60380 Confidential Assistant to the Chief of Staff to the Under Secretary, International Trade Administration. Effective June 09, 2006. DCGS00288 Confidential Assistant to the Director, Office of Business Liaison. Effective June 21, 2006. DCGS00640 Speechwriter to the Director of Public Affairs. Effective June 21, 2006. Section 213.3315 Department of Labor DLGS60174 Special Assistant to the Director of Operations. Effective June 13, 2006. DLGS60041 Staff Assistant to the Chief of Staff. Effective June 26, 2006. DLGS60144 Staff Assistant to the White House Liaison. Effective June 28, 2006. DLGS60077 Staff Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs. Effective June 30, 2006. Section 213.3316 Department of Health and Human Services DHGS60057 Special Assistant to the Director, Office of Refugee Resettlement. Effective June 09, 2006. DHGS60058 Confidential Assistant to the Director, Congressional Liaison Office. Effective June 16, 2006. DHGS60059 Deputy Director for Regional Outreach and Operations to the Director of Intergovernmental Affairs. Effective June 21, 2006. DHGS60127 Confidential Assistant to the Administrator, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Effective June 30, 2006. DHGS60418 Confidential Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (Policy and Strategy) to the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs. Effective June 30, 2006. DHGS60570 Confidential Assistant (Advance) to the Deputy Director for Advance. Effective June 30, 2006. Section 213.3317 Department of Education DBGS00516 Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights. Effective June 02, 2006. DBGS00537 Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff. Effective June 02, 2006. DBGS00538 Confidential Assistant to the Chief of Staff. Effective June 19, 2006. DBGS00540 Confidential Assistant to the Director, Scheduling and Advance Staff. Effective June 26, 2006. DBGS00541 Special Assistant to the Assistant Deputy Secretary for Safe and Drug-Free Schools. Effective June 26, 2006. DBGS00542 Special Assistant to the Executive Assistant. Effective June 26, 2006. DBGS00535 Senior Advisor to the Secretary to the Chief of Staff. Effective June 30, 2006. DBGS00539 Special Assistant to the Senior Counselor to the Secretary. Effective June 30, 2006. DBGS00543 Confidential Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Legislation and Congressional Affairs. Effective June 30, 2006. DBGS00544 Confidential Assistant to the Assistant Secretary, Office of Communications and Outreach. Effective June 30, 2006. DBGS00545 Director, Regional Services to the Assistant Secretary, Office of Communications and Outreach. Effective June 30, 2006. DBGS00548 Special Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Media Relations and Strategic Communications. Effective June 30, 2006. Section 213.3318 Environmental Protection Agency EPGS06018 Program Manager (Operations) to the Administrator. Effective June 16, 2006. EPGS03200 Director of Scheduling to the Deputy Chief of Staff (Operations). Effective June 21, 2006. EPGS06012 Director of Advance to the Deputy Chief of Staff (Operations). Effective June 26, 2006. EPGS06013 Strategic Scheduler to the Deputy Chief of Staff (Operations). Effective June 26, 2006. EPGS06014 Audio Visual Producer to the Deputy Chief of Staff (Operations). Effective June 26, 2006. EPGS06015 Staff Secretary to the Chief of Staff. Effective June 26, 2006. EPGS06016 Advance Specialist to the Deputy Chief of Staff (Operations). Effective June 26, 2006. Section 213.3323 Overseas Private Investment Corporation PQGS06015 Special Assistant to the Vice President, Investment Funds. Effective June 26, 2006. Section 213.3325 United States Tax Court JCGS60072 Trial Clerk to the Chief Judge. Effective June 15, 2006. Section 213.3327 Department of Veterans Affairs DVGS60050 Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Public and Intergovernmental Affairs. Effective June 13, 2006. Section 213.3331 Department of Energy DEGS00524 Assistant Press Secretary to the Director, Public Affairs. Effective June 02, 2006. DEGS00523 Trip Coordinator to the Director, Office of Scheduling and Advance. Effective June 21, 2006. DEGS00525 Deputy White House Liaison to the White House Liaison. Effective June 21, 2006. DEGS00526 Trip Coordinator to the Director, Office of Scheduling and Advance. Effective June 27, 2006. DEGS00527 Staff Assistant to the Director, Office of Scheduling and Advance. Effective June 27, 2006. Section 213.3332 Small Business Administration SBGS60169 Regional Administrator, Region I, Boston, Massachusetts to the Associate Administrator for Field Operations. Effective June 09, 2006. Section 213.3337 General Services Administration GSGS60095 White House Liaison to the Chief of Staff. Effective June 26, 2006. GSGS00179 Small Business Specialist to the Associate Administrator for Small Business Utilization. Effective June 30, 2006. Section 213.3356 Commission on Civil Rights CCGS00017 Special Assistant to a Commissioner. Effective June 26, 2006. Section 213.3384 Department of Housing and Urban Development DUGS60187 Staff Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs. Effective June 16, 2006. Section 213.3394 Department of Transportation DTGS60054 Associate Director for Governmental Affairs to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs. Effective June 16, 2006 DTGS60337 Executive Director for Public Affairs to the Administrator. Effective June 21, 2006. DTGS60381 Chief of Staff to the Administrator. Effective June 27, 2006. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 3301 and 3302; E.O. 10577, 3 CFR 1954-1958 Comp., p. 218. Office of Personnel Management. Dan G. Blair, Deputy Director. [FR Doc. E6-12785 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-39-P RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD Proposed Collection; Comment Request SUMMARY: In accordance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 which provides opportunity for public comment on new or revised data collections, the Railroad Retirement Board

(RRB)will publish periodic summaries of proposed data collections. *Comments are invited on:*

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

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

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden related to the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. *Title and purpose of information collection:* Application for Spouse Annuity Under the Railroad Retirement Act; OMB 3220-0042 Section 2(c) of the Railroad Retirement Act (RRA), provides for the payment of annuities to spouses of railroad retirement annuitants who meet the requirements under the RRA. The age requirements for a spouse annuity depend on the employee's age and date of retirement and the employee's years of railroad service. The requirements relating to the annuities are prescribed in 20 CFR 216, 218, 219, 232, 234, and 295. The RRB currently uses the electronic AA-3cert, *Application Summary and Certification* process and manual Form AA-3, *Application for Spouse/Divorced Spouse Annuity* , to obtain the information needed to determine an applicant's entitlement to an annuity and the amount of the annuity. The AA-3cert process obtains information from an applicant by means of an interview with an RRB field-office representative. During the interview, the field-office representative enters the information obtained into an on-line information system. Upon completion of the interview, the applicant receives Form AA-3cert, Application Summary and Certification, which summarizes the information that was provided by/or verified by the applicant, for review and signature. The RRB also uses manual Form AA-3 in instances where the RRB representative is unable to contact the applicant in person or by telephone; *i.e.* , the applicant lives in another country. The RRB estimates the burden for the collection as follows: Estimated Burden Form No. Estimated annual responses Estimated completion time (per response) Estimated annual burden (hours) AA-3cert 8,400 30 4,200 AA-3 (manual) 100 58 97 Total 8,500 4,297 The RRB proposes to add new items to Form(s) AA-3cert and AA-3 to further document an applicant's most recent nonrailroad work. The items ask for the applicant's most recent job title and whether their employer is a seasonal employer. Non-burden-impacting changes are proposed to the certification statements of Form(s) AA-3cert and AA-3 that are intended to provide additional specificity regarding post-application events that require an applicant to contact the RRB. Other non-burden impacting, editorial (clarification) and formatting changes to Form AA-3cert and Form AA-3 are also proposed. Completion is required to obtain a benefit. One response is requested of each respondent. *Additional Information or Comments:* To request more information or to obtain a copy of the information collection justification, forms, and/or supporting material, please call the RRB Clearance Officer at

(312)751-3363 or send an e-mail request to *Charles.Mierzwa@RRB.GOV.* Comments regarding the information collection should be addressed to Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2092 or send an e-mail to *Ronald.Hodapp@RRB.GOV.* Written comments should be received within 60 days of this notice. Charles Mierzwa, Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E6-12757 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7905-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission; Office of Filings and Information Services Washington, DC 20549. Extension: Rule 17f-1(b); SEC File No. 270-28; OMB Control No. 3235-0032. 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”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. • Rule 17f-1(b): Requirements for reporting and inquiry with respect to missing, lost, counterfeit, or stolen securities Rule 17f-1(b) (17 CFR 240.17f-1(b)) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* ) (the “Act”) requires approximately 26,000 entities in the securities industry to register in the Lost and Stolen Securities Program (“Program”). Registration fulfills a statutory requirement that entities report and inquire about missing, lost, counterfeit, or stolen securities. Registration also allows entities in the securities industry to gain access to a confidential database that stores information for the Program. We estimate that 1,000 new entities will register in the Program each year. The staff estimates that the average number of hours necessary to comply with the Rule 17f-1(b) is one-half hour. The total burden is therefore 500 hours (1,000 times one-half) annually for all participants. Rule 17f-1(b) is a registration obligation only. Registering under rule 17f-1(b) is mandatory to obtain the benefit of a central database that stores information about missing, lost, counterfeit, or stolen securities for the Program. Reporting institutions required to register under rule 17f-1(b) will not be kept confidential; however, the Program database will be kept confidential. Please note that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Comments should be directed to

(1)the Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or by sending an e-mail to: *David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov* ; and

(ii)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 30 days of this notice. Dated: July 31, 2006. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12696 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. Extension: Rule 202(a)(11)-1; SEC File No. 270-471; OMB Control No. 3235-0532. 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”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. The title for the collection of information is “Certain Broker-Dealers Deemed Not To Be Investment Advisers.” Rule 202(a)(11)-1 (17 CFR 275.202(a)(11)-1) under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-1 *et seq.* ) (“Advisers Act”) addresses the application of the Advisers Act to broker-dealers offering accounts charging an asset-based fee. The rule is intended to clarify when brokers offering these programs are subject to the provisions of the Advisers Act. The rule requires that all advertisements for brokerage accounts charging an asset-based fee and all agreements and contracts governing the operation of those accounts contain a certain prominent statement that the accounts are brokerage accounts and not advisory accounts. This collection of information is necessary so that customers are not confused with respect to the services that they are receiving, i.e., to prevent customers and prospective customers from mistakenly believing that the account is an advisory account subject to the Advisers Act. The collection assists customers in making informed decisions regarding whether to establish accounts. The respondents to this collection of information are all broker-dealers that are registered with the Commission. The Commission has estimated that the average annual burden for ensuring compliance with the disclosure element of the rule is 5 minutes per broker-dealer taking advantage of the rule. If all of the approximately 6,158 broker-dealers registered with the Commission took advantage of the rule, the total estimated annual burden would be 511 hours (.083 hours × 6,158 brokers). The rule imposes no additional requirements regarding record retention. The collection of information requirements under the rule are mandatory. Any information received by the Commission related to the rule would be kept confidential, subject to the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. General comments regarding the above information should be directed to the following persons:

(i)Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or e-mail to: *David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov* ; and

(ii)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 30 days of this notice. Dated: July 31, 2006. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12698 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. Extension: Rule 17f-1(c) and Form X-17F-1A; SEC File No. 270-29; OMB Control No. 3235-0037. 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”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. • Rule 17f-1(c) and Form X-17F-1A: Reporting of missing, lost, stolen, or counterfeit securities. Rule 17f-1(c) (17 CFR 240.17f-1(c)) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* ) (the “Act”) requires approximately 26,000 entities in the securities industry to report lost, stolen, missing, or counterfeit securities certificates to the Commission or its designee, to a registered transfer agent for the issue, and, when criminal activity is suspected, to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Such entities are required to use Form X-17F-1A (17 CFR 249.100) to make such reports. Filing these reports fulfills a statutory requirement that reporting institutions report and inquire about missing, lost, counterfeit, or stolen securities. Since these reports are compiled in a central database, the rule facilitates reporting institutions to access the database that stores information for the Lost and Stolen Securities Program. We estimate that 26,000 reporting institutions will report that securities certificates are either missing, lost, counterfeit, or stolen annually and that each reporting institution will submit this report 50 times each year. The staff estimates that the average amount of time necessary to comply with Rule 17f-1(c) and Form X-17F-1A is five minutes per submission. The total burden is 108,333 hours annually for the entire industry (26,000 times 50 times 5 divided by 60). Rule 17f-1(c) is a reporting rule and does not specify a retention period. The rule requires an incident-based reporting requirement by the reporting institutions when securities certificates are discovered to be missing, lost, counterfeit, or stolen. Registering under rule 17f-1(c) is mandatory to obtain the benefit of a central database that stores information about missing, lost, counterfeit, or stolen securities for the Lost and Stolen Securities Program. Reporting institutions required to register under Rule 17f-1(c) will not be kept confidential; however, the Lost and Stolen Securities Program database will be kept confidential. Please note that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Comments should be directed to

(i)the Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or by sending an e-mail to: *David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov* ; and

(1)clarify the nature of a CBOE Market-Maker's obligation to quote “continuously” in order to incorporate a “99% standard” applicable to electronic quotes; and

(2)provide that Hybrid Market-Makers are not required to use the QRM Mechanism. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change CBOE proposes to adopt CBOE Rule 1.1(ccc) to define the nature of CBOE Market-Makers' continuous electronic quoting obligations under the Exchange rules. CBOE also proposes to adopt CBOE Rule 8.18 to codify a description of the Quote Risk Monitor (“QRM”) Mechanism, which is a certain functionality the Exchange offers CBOE Market-Makers who have continuous electronic quoting obligations under Exchange rules for the Hybrid Trading System and Hybrid 2.0 Platform (“Hybrid”) to help them manage their quotations. The text of the proposed rule change, as amended, is below. Proposed new language is in *italics* ; proposed deletions are in [brackets]. Rule 1.1. Definitions When used in these Rules, unless the context otherwise requires: (a)-(bbb) No change. Continuous Electronic Quotes *(ccc) With respect to a Market-Maker who is obligated to provide continuous electronic quotes on the Hybrid Trading System or Hybrid 2.0 Platform (“Hybrid Market Maker”), the Hybrid Market-Maker shall be deemed to have provided “continuous electronic quotes” if the Hybrid Market-Maker provides electronic two-sided quotes for 99% of the time that the Hybrid Market-Maker is required to provide electronic quotes in an appointed option class on a given trading day. If a technical failure or limitation of a system of the Exchange prevents the Hybrid Market-Maker from maintaining, or prevents the Hybrid Market-Maker from communicating to the Exchange, timely and accurate electronic quotes in a class, the duration of such failure shall not be considered in determining whether the Hybrid Market-Maker has satisfied the 99% quoting standard with respect to that option class. The Exchange may consider other exceptions to this continuous electronic quote obligation based on demonstrated legal or regulatory requirements or other mitigating circumstances.* Rule 8.7—Obligations of Market-Makers (a)-(c) No change.

(d)Market Making Obligations in Applicable Hybrid Classes The following obligations in this paragraph

(d)are only applicable to Market-Makers trading classes on the CBOE Hybrid System and only in those Hybrid classes. As such, this paragraph has no applicability to non-Hybrid classes. This paragraph is not applicable to Remote Market-Makers, who instead will be subject to the obligations imposed by Rule 8.7(e). Unless otherwise provided in this Rule, Market-Makers trading classes on the Hybrid System remain subject to all obligations imposed by CBOE Rule 8.7. To the extent another obligation contained elsewhere in Rule 8.7 is inconsistent with an obligation contained in paragraph

(d)of Rule 8.7 with respect to a class trading on Hybrid, this paragraph

(d)shall govern trading in the Hybrid class. These requirements are applicable on a per class basis depending upon the percentage of volume a Market-Maker transacts electronically versus in open outcry. With respect to making this determination, the Exchange will monitor Market-Makers' trading activity every calendar quarter to determine whether they exceed the thresholds established in [this] paragraph

(d)*(i)* . If a Market-Maker exceeds the threshold established below, the obligations contained in (d)(ii) will be effective the next calendar quarter. For a period of ninety

(90)days commencing immediately after a class begins trading on the Hybrid system, the provisions of paragraph (d)(i) shall govern trading in that class.

(i)Market-Maker Trades [Less Than] 20% *or Less* Contract Volume Electronically: If a Market-Maker on the CBOE Hybrid System never transacts more than 20% ( *i.e.* , he trades 20% or less) of his contract volume electronically in an appointed Hybrid class during any calendar quarter, the following provisions shall apply to that Market-Maker with respect to that class:

(A)Quote Widths: With respect to electronic quoting, the Market-Maker will not be required to comply with the quote width requirements of CBOE Rule 8.7(b)(iv) in that class. The effectiveness of this subparagraph (i)(A) shall be in effect in each Hybrid for a period of one year commencing with the date the class begins trading on the Hybrid System.

(B)Continuous Electronic Quoting Obligation: The Market-Maker will not be obligated to quote electronically in any designated percentage of series within that class. If a Market-Maker quotes electronically, its undecremented quote must be for at least ten contracts (“10-up”), unless the underlying primary market disseminates a 100-share quote, in which case the Market-Maker's undecremented quote may be for as low as 1-contract (“1-up”). The ability to quote 1-up when the underlying primary quotes 100 shares is expressly conditioned on the process being automated ( *i.e.* , a Market-Maker may not manually adjust his quotes to reflect 1-up sizes). Quotes must automatically return to at least 10-up when the underlying primary market no longer disseminates a 100-share quote. Market-Makers that have not automated this process may not avail themselves of the relief provided herein. The ability to quote 1-up shall operate on a pilot basis and shall terminate February 17, 2006.

(C)Continuous Open Outcry Quoting Obligation: In response to any request for quote by a [floor broker or DPM representing an order as agent] *member or PAR Official,* Market-Makers must provide a two-sided market complying with the quote width requirements contained in Rule 8.7(b)(iv) for a minimum of ten contracts for non-broker-dealer orders and one contract for broker-dealer orders.

(D)In-Person Quoting Requirement: Any volume transacted electronically will not count towards the Market-Maker's in-person requirement contained in Rule 8.7.03(B).

(ii)Market-Maker Trades More Than 20% Contract Volume Electronically: If a Market-Maker on the CBOE Hybrid System transacts more than 20% of his contract volume electronically in an appointed Hybrid class during any calendar quarter, commencing the next calendar quarter he will be subject to the following quoting obligations in that class for as long as he remains in that class:

(A)Quote Widths: The Market-Maker must comply with the quote width requirements contained in Rule 8.7(b)(iv).

(B)Continuous *Electronic* Quoting Obligation: A Market-Maker will be required to maintain continuous electronic [two-sided] quotes *(as defined in Rule 1.1(ccc))* [for at least ten contracts (undecremented size)] in 60% of the series of his/her appointed class[es]. *The initial size of a Market-Maker's quote must be for at least ten contracts (undecremented size).* If the underlying primary market disseminates a 100-share quote, a Market-Maker's undecremented quote may be for as low as 1-contract (“1-up”), however, this ability is expressly conditioned on the process being automated ( *i.e.* , a Market-Maker may not manually adjust his quotes to reflect 1-up sizes). Quotes must automatically return to at least 10-up when the underlying primary market no longer disseminates a 100-share quote. Market-Makers that have not automated this process may not avail themselves of the relief provided herein. The ability to quote 1-up shall operate on a pilot basis and shall terminate February 17, 2006.

(C)Continuous Open Outcry Quoting Obligation: In response to any request for quote by a [floor broker or DPM representing an order as agent] *member or PAR Official,* in-crowd Market-Makers must provide a two-sided market complying with the current quote width requirements contained in Rule 8.7(b)(iv) for a minimum of ten contracts for non-broker-dealer orders and one contract for broker-dealer orders. *(iii) The obligations and duties of Market-Makers set forth in paragraphs (d)(i) and (d)(ii) apply to a Market-Maker on a per class basis and only when the Market-Maker is quoting in a particular class on a given trading day (e.g., if on a given trading day a Market-Maker is quoting in 1 of his/her 10 appointed classes, the Market-Maker has quote width, continuous electronic quoting and, to the extent the Market-Maker is present in the trading crowd, continuous open outcry quoting obligations in that class; the continuous electronic quoting obligation in subparagraph (d)(ii)(B) applies to 60% of the series of that class while the Market-Maker is quoting). The obligations and duties are not applicable to an appointed class if a Market-Maker is not quoting in that appointed class.* *(iv) A Market-Maker that is in the trading crowd but that is not quoting electronically or in open outcry in an appointed class must provide an open outcry two-sided market complying with the current quote width requirements contained in Rule 8.7(b)(iv) for a minimum of ten contracts for non-broker-dealer orders and one contract for broker-dealer orders in response to a request for quote by a member or PAR Official directed at that Market-Maker or when, in response to a general request for a quote by a member of PAR Official, a market is not then being vocalized by a reasonable number of Market-Makers. A Market-Maker may also be called upon by an Exchange official designated by the Board of Directors to submit a single quote or maintain continuous quotes in one or more series of a class to which the Market-Maker is appointed whenever, in the judgment of such official, it is necessary to do so in the interest of maintaining a fair and orderly market.*

(e)Obligations of Remote Market-Makers (RMMs): The following obligations apply only to RMMs:

(i)*An* RMM[s] must provide *legal-width,* continuous [two-sided, legal-width quotations] *electronic quotes (as defined in Rule 1.1(ccc))* in 60% of the series of [their] *its* appointed class[es]. The initial size of an RMM's quote must be for at least ten contracts (undecremented size). [The Exchange may consider exceptions to this quoting requirement based on demonstrated legal or regulatory requirements or other mitigating circumstances ( *e.g.* , excused leaves of absence, personal emergencies, or equipment problems).] If the underlying primary market disseminates a 100-share quote, an RMM's undecremented quote may be for as low as 1-contract (“1-up”), however, this ability is expressly conditioned on the process being automated ( *i.e.* , an RMM may not manually adjust its quotes to reflect 1-up sizes). Quotes must automatically return to at least 10-up when the underlying primary market no longer disseminates a 100-share quote. RMMs that have not automated this process may not avail themselves of the relief provided herein. The ability to quote 1-up shall operate on a pilot basis and shall terminate February 17, 2006. *The obligations and duties of an RMM set forth in this paragraph (e)(i) apply to an RMM on a per class basis and only when the RMM is logged on to the CBOE Hybrid system and quoting electronically in a particular class on a given trading day (e.g., if on a given trading day an RMM is logged in and quoting electronically in 1 of its 10 appointed classes, the RMM has quote width and continuous electronic quoting obligations in that class; the continuous electronic quoting obligation applies to 60% of the series of that class while the RMM is logged on to the CBOE Hybrid system and quoting electronically in that class). The obligations and duties are not applicable to an appointed class if an RMM is not logged in and quoting electronically in that appointed class.*

(ii)An RMM may be called upon by an Exchange official designated by the Board of Directors to submit a single *electronic* quote or maintain continuous *electronic* quotes in one or more series of a class to which the RMM is appointed whenever, in the judgment of such official, it is necessary to do so in the interest of maintaining a fair and orderly market. (iii)-(vi) No change. * * * Interpretations and Policies: .01-.13 No change. Rule 8.13. Preferred Market-Maker Program

(a)No change.

(b)Eligibility. Any Exchange Market-Maker type ( *e.g.* Remote Market-Maker, Lead Market-Maker, and Designated Primary Market-Maker) may be designated as a Preferred Market-Maker, however, a recipient of a Preferred Market-Maker order will only receive a participation entitlement for such order if the following provisions are met: (i)-(ii) No change.

(iii)The Preferred Market-Maker must comply with the quoting obligations applicable to its Market-Maker type under Exchange rules and must provide continuous [two-sided quotations] *electronic quotes (as defined in Rule 1.1(ccc))* in at least 90% of the series of each class for which it receives Preferred Market-Maker orders.

(c)No change. Rule 8.15A. Lead Market-Makers in Hybrid Classes

(a)No change.

(b)LMM Obligations: LMMs are required to:

(i)provide continuous [market quotations] *electronic quotes (as defined in Rule 1.1(ccc))* that comply with the bid/ask differentials permitted by Rule 8.7(b) in 90% of the option series within their assigned classes; (ii)-(vi) No change. Rule 8.18. Quote Risk Monitor Mechanism *Each Market-Maker who is obligated to provide and maintain continuous electronic quotes (as defined in Rule 1.1(ccc)) in an option class traded on the Hybrid Trading System or the Hybrid 2.0 Platform (“Hybrid Market-Maker”) may establish parameters by which the Exchange will activate the Quote Risk Monitor (“QRM”) Mechanism. Hybrid Market-Makers that use the QRM Mechanism shall specify, for each such option class in which the Hybrid Market-Maker is engaged in trading, a maximum number of contracts for such option class (the “Contract Limit”) and a rolling time period in seconds within which such Contract Limit is to be measured (the “Measurement Interval”). When the Exchange determines that the Hybrid Market-Maker has traded more than the Contract Limit for such option class during any rolling Measurement Interval, the QRM Mechanism shall cancel all electronic quotes that are being disseminated with respect to that Hybrid Market-Maker in that option class until the Hybrid Market-Maker refreshes those electronic quotes.* Rule 8.85. DPM Obligations

(a)Dealer Transactions. Each DPM shall fulfill all of the obligations of a Market-Maker under the Rules, and shall satisfy each of the following requirements in respect of each of the securities allocated to the DPM. To the extent that there is any inconsistency between the specific obligations of a DPM set forth in subparagraphs (a)(i) through (a)(xi) of this Rule and the general obligations of a Market-Maker under the Rules, subparagraphs (a)(i) through (a)(xi) of this Rule shall govern. Each DPM shall:

(i)provide continuous [market quotations] *electronic quotes (as defined in Rule 1.1(ccc))* for each class and series allocated to it and assure that its disseminated market quotations are accurate; (ii)-(xii) No change. (b)-(e) No change. * * * Interpretations and Policies: .01-.03 No change. Rule 8.93. e-DPM Obligations Each e-DPM shall fulfill all of the obligations of a Market-Maker and of a DPM under the Rules (except those contained in Rules 8.85(a)(i),(iv),(v) and (vii)-(x), 8.85(b), 8.85(c)(i) and (v), and 8.85(e)), and shall satisfy each of the following requirements:

(i)provide continuous [two-sided quotations] *electronic quotes (as defined in Rule 1.1(ccc))* in at least 90% of the series of each allocated class, or alternatively, respond to 98% of Requests for Quotes

(RFQs)if RFQ functionality is enabled as determined by the Exchange; (ii)-(xi) No change. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it had received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item III below. CBOE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Proposed CBOE Rule 1.1(ccc) The purpose of the proposed change to CBOE Rule 1.1 is to define the nature of a CBOE Market-Maker's obligation to provide “continuous” electronic quotes in an option class traded on Hybrid. This continuous electronic quoting obligation is contained in various CBOE rules—including CBOE Rules 8.7(d)(ii)(B), 8.7(e), 8.13(b)(iii), 8.14(b)(2), 8.15A(b)(i), 8.85(a)(i), and 8.93(i)—and these rules in turn prescribe the percentage of the series of an option class with respect to which specified types of Market-Makers (“Hybrid Market-Makers”) have an obligation to provide continuous electronic quotes. Proposed CBOE Rule 1.1(ccc) will provide that a Hybrid Market-Maker satisfies the continuous electronic quoting obligation by providing electronic quotes for 99% of the time that the Hybrid Market-Maker is obligated to provide electronic quotes in an appointed option class on a given trading day. Proposed CBOE Rule 1.1(ccc) recognizes that there is always an interval between successive electronic quotes and that “continuous” electronic quoting cannot literally preclude all gaps in electronic quoting. In addition, gaps in electronic quoting are expected in certain circumstances. For instance, a Hybrid Market-Maker requires time to repost electronic quotes either after the quantity associated with an electronic quote has been exhausted by trades done at the quoted price or after electronic quotes have been canceled pursuant to the Quote Risk Monitor covered by proposed CBOE Rule 8.18. In applying the proposed definition, the Exchange notes that the duration of a Hybrid Market-Maker's continuous electronic quoting obligation, and the percentage of series to which that obligation applies, varies depending on the particular type of Market-Maker. For instance, the Exchange rules impose a continuous electronic quoting obligation for the time the Exchange is open for trading in 100% of the series in each of a Designated Primary Market-Maker's (“DPM”) appointed classes, in 90% of the series in each of an Electronic DPM's (“e-DPM”) appointed classes, and in 90% of the series in each of a Lead Market-Maker's (“LMM”) appointed classes. The Exchange thus believes that these types of Market-Makers should be deemed to have provided continuous electronic quotes with respect to the applicable percentage of series in an option class if the respective DPM, e-DPM, or LMM has provided electronic quotes for 99% of the time that the Exchange is open for trading in that option class on a given trading day. The Exchange rules also impose a continuous electronic quoting obligation in 60% of the series in the respective Market-Maker's or Remote Market-Maker's (“RMM”) appointed class which applies only during the time the Market-Maker is quoting in the class or the RMM is logged onto Hybrid and quoting in that class. The Exchange thus believes that these two types of Market-Makers should be deemed to have provided continuous electronic quotes with respect to the applicable percentage of series in an option class if the respective Market-Maker or RMM has provided electronic quotes for 99% of the time that he is quoting in the class (in the case of a Market-Maker) or logged into Hybrid and quoting in that option class (in the case of an RMM) on a given trading day. Consequently, in calculating compliance with CBOE Rule 1.1(ccc), any time interval during which the Market-Maker or RMM has ceased quoting in that option class ( *e.g.* , while taking breaks, during lunch or upon ceasing trading for the day) would not be considered. The Exchange believes that the 99% standard sets an appropriately high threshold for continuous electronic quoting, while also recognizing the circumstances under which a Hybrid Market-Maker may require a brief time interval in order to post new electronic quotes. This 99% standard is similar to one contained in a rule submitted by the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (“PCX”) and approved by the Commission. 4 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51740 (May 25, 2005), 70 FR 32686 (June 3, 2005) (SR-PCX-2005-64) (notice of filing and order granting accelerated approval to SR-PCX-2005-64). The Exchange does not believe that a Hybrid Market-Maker has failed to quote continuously if Exchange technical problems prevent electronic quotes from being provided. Accordingly, if a technical failure or limitation in an Exchange system prevents a Hybrid Market-Maker from maintaining, or communicating to the Exchange, timely and accurate electronic quotes, proposed CBOE Rule 1.1(ccc) would exclude the duration of that technical failure or limitation in determining whether the Hybrid Market-Maker has satisfied the 99% continuous electronic quote obligation with respect to that option class. Proposed CBOE Rule 1.1(ccc) will also provide that the Exchange may consider other exceptions to the continuous electronic quote obligation based on demonstrated legal or regulatory requirements or other mitigating circumstances. 5 This provision is the same as an existing provision with respect to continuous electronic quoting obligations of RMMs contained in CBOE Rule 8.7(e). The Exchange believes it is appropriate to apply the same considerations to all Hybrid Market-Makers with continuous electronic quoting obligations and including this provision within the text of proposed CBOE Rule 1.1(ccc) accordingly reflects that principle. The Exchange is also proposing to amend various rules to include cross-references to the definition of “continuous electronic quotes” contained in proposed CBOE Rule 1.1(ccc). The Exchange will conduct regulatory surveillance for compliance with the 99% continuous electronic quote requirement set forth in CBOE Rule 1.1(ccc). 5 Mitigating circumstances that may be considered by the Exchange may include, but is not limited to, instances where a technical failure or limitation in a Hybrid Market-Maker's system prevents the Hybrid Market-Maker from maintaining, or communicating to the Exchange, timely and accurate electronic quotes. However, a pattern or practice of technical failures or limitations, or the excessive frequency of technical failures or limitations, may also be considered by the Exchange in determining whether to except the period of time from the continuous electronic quoting requirements. The Exchange is proposing various clarifying changes to CBOE Rule 8.7 respecting Market-Maker and RMM quoting obligations in order to clarify the intent and application of the rule that the continuous electronic quoting obligations apply on a per class basis and only during the time the respective Market-Maker is quoting or respective RMM is logged onto Hybrid and quoting, and to clarify certain open outcry quoting obligations. First, the changes make clear that obligations and duties of Market-Makers, as set forth in paragraph

(d)of CBOE Rule 8.7, apply to a Market-Maker on a per class basis and only when the Market-Maker is quoting in a particular class on a given trading day ( *e.g.* , if on a given trading day a Market-Maker is quoting in 1 of his 10 appointed classes, the Market-Maker has quote width, continuous electronic quoting and, to the extent the Market-Maker is present in the trading crowd, continuous open outcry quoting obligations in that 1 class; the continuous electronic quoting obligation applies in 60% of the series of that class while the Market-Maker is quoting in that class). The obligations and duties are not applicable to an appointed class if a Market-Maker is not quoting in an appointed class. The clarifications also make clear that, under certain circumstances, a Market-Maker present in the trading crowd may still be obligated to provide a quote in an appointed class that he is not currently quoting in electronically or in open outcry. Specifically, a Market-Maker in the trading crowd must provide an open outcry two-sided market complying with the Exchange rules on quote width and size in response to a request for quote directed at that Market-Maker or when, in response to a general request for a quote, a market is not then being vocalized in that series by a reasonable number of Market-Makers. These obligations are derived from CBOE Rule 8.7(b), which describes various conditions that trigger a Market-Maker's duty to verbalize a market in a particular option series. In addition, a Market-Maker may also be called upon by an Exchange official designated by the Board of Directors to submit a single quote or maintain continuous quotes in one or more series of a class to which the Market-Maker is appointed whenever, in the judgment of such official, it is necessary to do so in the interest of maintaining a fair and orderly market. This Exchange official provision is parallel to language that is already provided in paragraph

(e)for RMMs. Second, the changes make clear the obligations and duties of RMMs, as set forth in paragraph

(e)of CBOE Rule 8.7, apply to an RMM on a per class basis and only when the RMM is logged on to the CBOE Hybrid system and quoting in a particular class on a given trading day ( *e.g.* , if on a given trading day an RMM is logged in and quoting in 1 of its 10 appointed classes, the RMM has quote width and continuous electronic quoting obligations in that 1 class; the continuous electronic quoting obligation applies in 60% of the series of that class while the RMM is logged in and quoting in that class). The obligations and duties are not applicable to an appointed class if an RMM is not logged in and quoting in that appointed class. Clarifying language proposed to be added to paragraph

(e)make clear these obligations and duties of RMMs. Finally, the Exchange is proposing to amend the text in paragraphs (d)(i)(C) and (d)(ii)(C) of CBOE Rule 8.7, which pertains to the continuous open outcry quoting obligation of Market-Makers. The revised text will provide that the open outcry quoting obligation is triggered in response to a request for quote by a member or Exchange PAR Official. As currently written, the obligation is only triggered in response to a request for quote from a floor broker or a DPM representing an order as agent, the later of which is an outdated reference because DPMs no longer perform an agency function. 6 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52798 (November 18, 2005), 70 FR 71344 (November 28, 2005) (order approving amendments relating to the removal of agency responsibilities from DPMs and the establishment of PAR Officials). Proposed CBOE Rule 8.18 Through this rule change, the Exchange is also seeking to codify in its rules a service CBOE offers Hybrid Market-Makers to help them manage their quotations. As discussed above, CBOE Rules require Hybrid Market-Makers to maintain continuous electronic quotes. To comply with this requirement, each Hybrid Market-Maker can employ its own proprietary quotation and risk management systems to determine the prices and sizes at which it quotes. In addition, Hybrid also has the QRM Mechanism, which is designed to help Hybrid Market-Makers manage their quotations in related option series. A Hybrid Market-Maker's risk in an options class is not limited to the risk in a single series of that class. Rather, a Hybrid Market-Maker typically is active in quoting in multiple option classes, and each such option class can comprise dozens of individual option series. Under the Hybrid systems, trades are automatically effected against the Hybrid Market-Maker's then current quote. As a result, a Hybrid Market-Maker faces exposure in all series of a class, requiring that the Hybrid Market-Maker off-set or otherwise hedge its overall position in a class. The QRM functionality described in Proposed CBOE Rule 8.18 helps Hybrid Market-Makers limit this overall exposure and risk. Specifically, the functionality permits a Hybrid Market-Maker to establish parameters in the Hybrid to cancel its electronic quotes in all series of an option class until the Hybrid Market-Maker refreshes those electronic quotes. Under proposed CBOE Rule 8.18, each Hybrid Market-Maker that elect to use the functionality would be required to specify two parameters that the QRM Mechanism would use to determine when that Hybrid Market-Maker's quotes should be cancelled. In particular, each Hybrid Market-Maker is required to specify a maximum number of contracts for each option class (the “Contract Limit”) and a rolling time period in seconds during which such Contract Limit is to be measured (the “Measurement Interval”). When the QRM Mechanism determines that the Hybrid Market-Maker has traded more than the Contract Limit for any option class during any rolling Measurement Interval, the QRM Mechanism automatically cancels all of the Hybrid Market-Maker's quotes in any series of that option class. By limiting its exposure across series, a Hybrid Market-Maker is better able to quote aggressively in an option, knowing that the QRM Mechanism will automatically cancel all its quotations in a class when its exposure limit it hit. The Exchange notes that the proposed rule would not relieve a Hybrid Market-Maker of its obligations to provide continuous electronic quotes under the Exchange rules nor to provide “firm” quotes pursuant to the requirements of CBOE Rule 8.51. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 7 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 8 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, 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. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would 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 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, 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-CBOE-2005-93 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-CBOE-2005-93. 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 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 publicly available. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2005-93 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2006. IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change After careful review, 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. 9 In particular, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 10 which requires among other things, that the rules of the Exchange are designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, 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. 9 In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered its impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The Commission believes that the proposed QRM Mechanism should provide Hybrid Market-Makers assistance in effectively managing its quotations. In conjunction with the implementation of the QRM Mechanism, CBOE proposes to define the nature of Hybrid Market-Makers' continuous electronic quoting obligations under its rules. The Commission believes that it is consistent with the Act to allow CBOE to define “continuous electronic quotes” as providing electronic two-sided quotes for 99% of the time that the Hybrid Market-Maker is required to provide electronic quotes in an appointed option class on a given trading day. The Commission notes that when the QRM Mechanism is triggered for an option class it will automatically cancel all of the Hybrid Market-Maker's quotes in any series of that option class. The Commission believes that the proposed definition of “continuous electronic quotes” should provide a Hybrid Market-Maker a brief amount of time to update its quotes after the QRM Mechanism has canceled its quotes in an option class. In addition, CBOE proposes certain clarifying changes to CBOE Rule 8.7 regarding Market-Maker and RMM quoting obligations. Specifically, CBOE proposes to clarify the intent and application of the rule that the continuous electronic quoting obligations apply on a per class basis and only during the time the respective Market-Maker is quoting or respective RMM is logged onto Hybrid and quoting, and to clarify certain open outcry quoting obligations. The Commission believes that these clarifying changes are appropriate and consistent with the Act. The Commission notes that the proposal does not alter the obligations of Hybrid Market-Makers, except for the fact that it will specifically define what it means to provide continuous electronic quotes. The Commission also notes that CBOE has represented that it will conduct routine surveillance for Hybrid Market-Maker compliance with the 99% standard for continuous electronic quotes set forth in CBOE Rule 1.1(ccc). CBOE has requested that the Commission find good cause for approving the proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after publication of notice thereof in the **Federal Register** . The Commission notes that similar proposals to provide protection from risk for market makers have been approved for other options exchanges. 11 The Commission believes that granting accelerated approval of the proposal should allow Hybrid Market-Makers to have similar protections from the risk associated with an excessive number of near simultaneous executions in a single options class. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 12 for approving the proposed rule change, as amended, prior to the thirtieth day after the date of publication of notice thereof in the **Federal Register** . 11 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51049 (January 18, 2005), 70 FR 3756 (January 26, 2005) (SR-BSE-2004-52); 51050 (January 18, 2005), 70 FR 3758 (January 26, 2005) (SR-ISE-2004-31); 51740 (May 25, 2005), 70 FR 32686 (June 3, 2005) (SR-PCX-2005-64); 53148 (January 19, 2006), 71 FR 4386 (January 26, 2006) (SR-Amex-2005-131); and 53166 (January 23, 2006), 71 FR 4625 (January 27, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-05). 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 13 that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2005-93) and Amendment No. 1 thereto be, and hereby are, approved on an accelerated basis. 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12740 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54253; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-018] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Regarding Technical and Conforming Changes to Nasdaq's 2000 and 3000 Series Rules July 31, 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 25, 2006, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Exchange” or “Nasdaq”), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by Nasdaq. Nasdaq has filed this proposed rule change as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 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). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Nasdaq proposes to conform the Rule 2000 and 3000 Series of Nasdaq's rules to certain changes made to the Rule 2000 and 3000 Series of the rules of National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) since approval of Nasdaq's rules by the Commission in January 2006, to make several minor modifications, and to correct certain typographical errors in the approved rules. Nasdaq proposes to implement the proposed rule change immediately. The text of the proposed rule change is included below. Proposed new language is *italicized* ; deletions are [bracketed]. 2111. Trading Ahead of Customer Market Orders

(a)Nasdaq members and persons associated with a member shall comply with NASD Rule 2111 as if such Rule were part of Nasdaq's rules.

(b)For purposes of this Rule, references to IM-2110-2, Rule 2320, *and* Rule 3110[, and Rule 6440] shall be construed as references to Nasdaq IM-2110-2, Nasdaq Rule 2320, *and* Nasdaq Rule 3110[, and Nasdaq Rule 6440].

(c)Nasdaq members and persons associated with a member relying upon the exemption set forth in NASD Rule 2111(f) shall comply with the provisions of the NASD Rule 4600 Series and 6400 Series cited therein as if such Rules were part of Nasdaq's Rules. Nasdaq and NASD Regulation, an affiliate of NASD, are parties to the Regulatory Contract pursuant to which NASD Regulation has agreed to perform certain functions on behalf of Nasdaq. Therefore, Nasdaq members are complying with Nasdaq Rule 2111( *f* ) by complying with NASD Rule 2111( *f* ) as written, including, for example, filing requirements and notifications. In addition, functions performed by NASD Regulation, NASD Regulation departments, and NASD Regulation staff under Nasdaq Rule 2111( *f* ) are being performed by NASD Regulation on behalf of Nasdaq. 2520. Margin Requirements

(a)No change.

(b)A member designated to Nasdaq for oversight pursuant to SEC Rule 17d-1 shall comply with the initial and maintenance margin requirements of Regulation T and the NASD Rule 2520 as if such Rules were part *of* Nasdaq's Rules.

(c)No change. [(c)]( *d* ) Pursuant to the Rule 9600 Series, Nasdaq may exempt any member from the requirements contained in paragraph (e)(3) of NASD Rule 2520, as applied to Nasdaq members through Nasdaq Rule 2520, if the account referenced in paragraph (e)(3) of NASD Rule 2520 is confined exclusively to transactions and positions in exempted securities. 2810. Direct Participation Programs

(a)No change.

(b)For purposes of this Rule 2810: (1)—(2) No change.

(3)for purposes of this Rule only, Nasdaq members and their associated persons shall comply with applicable provisions of NASD Rule 2710 as [of] *if* such Rule were part of Nasdaq's Rules.

(c)No change. 2852. Reporting Requirements

(a)Each member shall file with Nasdaq *Regulation* a report with respect to each account in which the member has an interest, each account of a partner, officer, director or employee of such member, and each customer account of the member, which has established an aggregate position of 100,000 index warrants on the same side of the market in an index warrant issue listed on Nasdaq, combining such index warrant position with positions in index warrants overlying the same index on the same side of the market traded on Nasdaq or another national securities exchange.

(b)Such report shall identify the person or persons having an interest in such account and shall identify separately the total number of each type of index warrant that comprises the reportable position in such account. The report shall be in such form as may be prescribed by Nasdaq *Regulation* and shall be filed no later than the close of business on the next business day following the day on which the transaction or transactions necessitating the filing of such report occurred. Whenever a report shall be required to be filed with respect to an account pursuant to this Rule, the member filing such report shall file with Nasdaq *Regulation* such additional periodic reports with respect to such account as Nasdaq *Regulation* may from time to time prescribe. 2853. Liquidation of Index Warrant Positions

(a)Whenever Nasdaq *Regulation* determines that a person or group of persons acting in concert holds or controls an aggregate position (whether short or long) in index warrants overlying the same index in excess of the position limitations established by Rule 2850, it may, when deemed necessary or appropriate in the public interest and for the protection of investors, direct any member or all members carrying a position in index warrants overlying such index for such person or persons to liquidate such position or positions, or portions thereof, as expeditiously as possible and consistent with the maintenance of an orderly market, so as to bring such person or persons into compliance with the position limitations contained in Rule 2850.

(b)Whenever such a directive is issued by Nasdaq *Regulation* no member receiving notice thereof shall accept and/or execute for any person or persons named in such directive any order to purchase or sell short any index warrants based on the same index, unless in each instance express approval therefor is given by Nasdaq *Regulation* , or the directive is rescinded. 2854. [Trading Halts or Suspensions] *Reserved* [(a) The trading in an index warrant on Nasdaq shall be halted whenever Nasdaq Regulation shall conclude that such action is appropriate in the interests of a fair and orderly market and to protect investors. Among the factors that may be considered are the following:] [(1) trading has been halted or suspended in underlying stocks whose weighted value represents 20% or more of the index value;] [(2) the current calculation of the index derived from the current market prices of the stocks is not available;] [(3) other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present.] [(b) Trading in index warrants that has been the subject of a trading halt or suspension may resume if Nasdaq Regulation determines that the conditions which led to the halt or suspension are no longer present or that the interests of a fair and orderly market are served by a resumption of trading. In either event, the reopening may not occur until Nasdaq Regulation has determined that trading in underlying stocks whose weighted value represents more than 50% of the index is occurring.] *IM-3010-1. Standards for Reasonable Review* *(a) Nasdaq members and persons associated with a member shall comply with NASD Interpretive Material IM-3010-1 as if such Rule were part of Nasdaq's Rules.* *(b) For purposes of this Rule:* *(1) references to Rule 3010 shall be construed as references to Nasdaq Rule 3010; and* *(2) references to “NASD Rules” shall be construed as references to “Nasdaq Rules”.* IM-3010- *2.* Guidance on Heightened Supervision Requirements Nasdaq members shall comply with NASD Notice to Members 97-19 as if such Rule were part of Nasdaq's Rules. *IM-3011-1. Independent Testing Requirements* * Nasdaq members and persons associated with a member shall comply with NASD Interpretive Material IM-3011-1 as if such Rule were part of Nasdaq's Rules. For purposes of this Rule, references to Rule 3011 shall be construed as references to Nasdaq Rule 3011. * *IM-3011-2. Review of Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Person Information* *Nasdaq members and persons associated with a member shall comply with NASD Interpretive Material IM-3011-2 as if such Rule were part of Nasdaq's Rules. For purposes of this Rule, references to Rule 3011 shall be construed as references to Nasdaq Rule 3011.* *3012. Supervisory Control System*

(a)Members and persons associated with a member shall comply with NASD Rule 3012 as if such Rule were part of Nasdaq's rules. *Nasdaq and NASD Regulation, an affiliate of NASD, are parties to the Regulatory Contract pursuant to which NASD Regulation has agreed to perform certain functions on behalf of Nasdaq. Therefore, Nasdaq members are complying with Nasdaq Rule 3012 by complying with NASD Rule 3012 as written, including, for example, filing requirements and notifications. In addition, functions performed by NASD Regulation, NASD Regulation departments, and NASD Regulation staff under Nasdaq Rule 3012 are being performed by NASD Regulation on behalf of Nasdaq.*

(b)No change. 3080. Disclosure to Associated Persons When Signing Form U[-]4 Nasdaq Members shall comply with NASD Rule 3080 as if such Rule were part of Nasdaq's Rules. In lieu of incorporating in the written statement the language in paragraph

(2)of NASD Rule 3080, members shall include the following provision: A claim alleging employment discrimination, including a sexual harassment claim, in violation of a statute is not required to be arbitrated under Nasdaq rules. Such a claim may be arbitrated under Nasdaq rules only if the parties have agreed to arbitrate it, either before or after the dispute arose. The rules of other arbitration forums may be different. 3110. Books and Records (a)-(e) No change.

(f)Requirements When Using Predispute Arbitration Agreements With Customers (1)-(2) No change. (3)(A) A member shall provide a customer with a copy of any predispute arbitration clause or customer agreement executed between the customer and the member, or inform the customer that the member does not have a copy thereof, within ten business days of receipt of the customer's request. If a customer requests such a copy before the member has provided the customer with a copy pursuant to subparagraph (2)(B) of this [Rule] *paragraph* , the member must provide a copy to the customer by the earlier date required by this subparagraph (3)(A) or by subparagraph (2)(B).

(B)No change. (4)-(7) No change. (g)-(j) No change. 3130. Regulation of Activities of Members Experiencing Financial and/or Operational Difficulties

(a)A member designated to Nasdaq for oversight pursuant to SEC Rule 17d-1 shall comply with NASD Rule 3130 (except NASD Rule 3130(a)) as if such Rule were part *of* Nasdaq's Rules.

(b)No change. IM-3130. Restrictions on a Member's Activity

(a)A member designated to Nasdaq for oversight pursuant to SEC Rule 17d-1 shall comply with NASD Interpretive Material 3130 (except IM-3130(d)) as if *such* Rule were part of Nasdaq's Rules.

(b)No change. 3360. Short-Interest Reporting

(a)To the extent such information is not otherwise reported to the NASD in conformance with NASD Rule 3360, each member shall maintain a record of total “short” positions in all customer and proprietary firm accounts in securities listed on Nasdaq and shall regularly report such information to Nasdaq in such a manner as may be prescribed by Nasdaq. [For the purposes of this rule, the term “customer” includes a broker/dealer.] Reports shall be made as of the close of the settlement date designated by Nasdaq. Reports shall be received by Nasdaq no later than the second business day after the reporting settlement date designated by Nasdaq.

(b)For purposes of this Rule[,] *:* *(1)* “short” positions to be reported are those resulting from “short sales” as that term is defined in SEC Rule 200[, under the Act] *of Regulation SHO* , with the exception of positions that meet the requirements of Subsections (e)(1), (6), (7), (8), and

(10)of SEC Rule 10a-1 adopted under the Act[.] *; and*

(2)the term “customer” includes a broker-dealer. 3380. Order Entry and Execution Practices *No member or associated person may engage in conduct that has the intent or effect of splitting any order into multiple smaller orders for execution or any execution into multiple smaller executions for transaction reporting for the primary purpose of maximizing a monetary or in-kind amount to be received by the member or associated person as a result of the execution of such orders or the transaction reporting of such executions. For purposes of this rule, “monetary or in-kind amount” shall be defined to include, but not be limited to, any credits, commissions, gratuities, payments for or rebates of fees, or any other payments of value to the member or associated person.* 338[0] *1* . SEC Rule 19c-1—Governing Certain Off-Board Agency Transactions by Members of National Securities Exchanges No rule, stated policy, or practice of this exchange shall prohibit or condition, or be construed to prohibit or condition or otherwise limit, directly or indirectly, the ability of any member acting as agent to effect any transaction otherwise than on this exchange with another person (except when such member also is acting as agent for such other person in such transaction), in any equity security listed on this exchange or to which unlisted trading privileges on this exchange have been extended. 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 Nasdaq is modifying its 2000 and 3000 Series Rules, which are based to a substantial extent on comparable NASD Rules, to conform them to certain changes made to the Rule 2000 and 3000 Series of the rules of NASD since approval of Nasdaq's rules by the Commission in January 2006, to make several minor modifications, and to correct certain typographical errors in the approved rules. Specifically, Nasdaq is: • Amending Nasdaq Rule 2111, which incorporates NASD Rule 2111 by reference, to reflect certain changes to the underlying text of that rule made by SR-NASD-2005-139. 5 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52998 (December 22, 2005), 70 FR 77223 (December 29, 2005) (SR-NASD-2005-139). • Amending Nasdaq Rules 2852 and 2853 at the request of SEC staff to reflect that certain functions identified therein will be performed by Nasdaq Regulation staff. • Deleting Nasdaq Rule 2854, governing trading halts and suspension of index warrants, so that it may be transferred to Nasdaq Rule 4120, which contains Nasdaq's other rules concerning trading halts and suspensions. The change to Nasdaq Rule 4120 will be made by a corresponding filing concerning technical amendments to the Nasdaq 4000 Series rules that Nasdaq will submit on or prior to August 1, 2006 on an immediately effective basis. • Incorporating by reference NASD IM-3013-1, which was added to the NASD Rules by SR-NASD-2003-104, 6 and making a conforming change to the numbering of current Nasdaq IM-3010. 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52403 (September 9, 2005), 70 FR 54782 (September 16, 2005) (SR-NASD-2003-104). • Incorporating by reference NASD IM-3011-1 and IM-3011-2, which were added to the NASD Rules by SR-NASD-2005-066. 7 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53030 (December 28, 2005), 71 FR 632 (January 5, 2006) (SR-NASD-2005-066). • Amending Nasdaq Rule 3012, which incorporates NASD Rule 3012 by reference, to include language that reflects a filing requirement added to the NASD Rule by SR-NASD-2005-084. 8 8 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52799 (November 18, 2005), 70 FR 71573 (November 29, 2005) (SR-NASD-2005-084). • Amending Nasdaq Rule 3360 to reflect minor changes made to the comparable NASD Rule by SR-NASD-2005-112. 9 9 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53224 (February 3, 2006), 71 FR 7101 (February 10, 2006) (SR-NASD-2005-112). • Adopting new Nasdaq Rule 3380, which is based on NASD Rule 3380, and which was added to the NASD Rules by SR-NASD-2005-144, 10 and renumbering existing Nasdaq Rule 3380 as Nasdaq Rule 3381. 10 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53371 (February 24, 2006), 71 FR 11008 (March 3, 2006). • Amending Nasdaq Rules 2520, 2810, 3080, 3110, 3130, and Nasdaq IM-3130 to correct typographical errors. 2. Statutory Basis Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act, 11 in general, and with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 12 in particular, in that the proposal is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The proposed rule change conforms the Rule 2000 and 3000 Series of Nasdaq's rules to certain changes made to the Rule 2000 and 3000 Series of NASD rules since approval of Nasdaq's rules by the Commission in January 2006, makes several minor modifications and corrects certain typographical errors in the approved rules. 11 15 U.S.C. 78f. 12 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 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 were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 13 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 14 thereunder because it does not:

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

(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, provided that the self-regulatory organization has given the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the filing date of the proposed rule change. 15 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 15 As required under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), Nasdaq provided the Commission with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five days prior to the filing date. Nasdaq has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-operative period requirement for “non-controversial” proposals, based upon a representation that such waiver will allow Nasdaq to implement the rule changes, which have either recently been made effective as changes to NASD rules or are technical in nature, prior to the time when Nasdaq begins to operate as a national securities exchange. The Commission believes that waiver of the operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Waiver of the 30-day operative period will allow Nasdaq to implement these changes immediately so that they can be in place prior to the time Nasdaq begins to operate as a national securities exchange. Accordingly, the Commission designates the proposal to be effective and operative upon filing with the Commission. 16 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. 16 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rules impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-018 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-018. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of NASDAQ. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-018 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 17 17 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12697 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54248; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-019] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Regarding Technical and Conforming Changes to Nasdaq's 4000 Series Rules July 31, 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 28, 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 Nasdaq. Nasdaq has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a non-controversial rule change pursuant to 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. 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 requested the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay, as specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change. Nasdaq proposes to conform the Rule 4000 Series of Nasdaq's rules to certain changes made to the Rule 4000 Series of the rules of the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) since approval of Nasdaq's rules by the Commission in January 2006 and to correct certain errors in the approved rules. Nasdaq proposes to implement the proposed rule change immediately. The text of the proposed rule change is available on Nasdaq's Web site ( *www.complinet.com/nasdaq* ), at Nasdaq'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, 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 the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change. 1. Purpose. Nasdaq is modifying its 4000 Series Rules to conform them to certain changes made to the 4000 Series Rules of the NASD since approval of Nasdaq's rules by the Commission in January 2006 and to correct certain typographical errors in the approved rules. Specifically, Nasdaq is: • Amending Nasdaq Rule 4120 to reflect changes made by SR-NASD-2006-015 6 in connection with the implementation of the Nasdaq Halt Cross, and to add language concerning halts in Nasdaq index warrants that is being relocated from former Nasdaq Rule 2854. 7 6 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53687 (April 20, 2006), 71 FR 24787 (April 27, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-015). Nasdaq notes that a further amendment to Rule 4120 was approved by the Commission in Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54155 (July 14, 2006), 71 FR 41291 (July 20, 2006) (SR-NASDAQ-2006-001), but with an implementation date of August 28, 2006. Accordingly, Nasdaq will file a technical rule change prior to that date to reflect the difference between the version of the rule adopted in this filing for the period prior to August 28, and the version to take effect on that date. 7 SR-NASDAQ-2006-018 (July 25, 2006). • Amending Nasdaq Rule 4120 to update contact information for Nasdaq's MarketWatch Department and amending Nasdaq IM-4120 and Nasdaq Rules 4310, 4320, and 4350 to remove superfluous and outdated contact information. • Amending Nasdaq Rule 4305 to change a reference to the Nasdaq National Market to the Nasdaq Global Market, consistent with changes made through SR-NASDAQ-2006-007. 8 8 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53799 (May 12, 2006), 71 FR 29195 (May 19, 2006) (SR-NASDAQ-2006-007). • Amending Nasdaq Rule 4320 to eliminate phase-in dates that have already passed and rule text that has been superseded by the phased-in rules. 9 9 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50753 (November 29, 2004), 69 FR 70486 (December 6, 2004) (SR-NASD-2004-147). • Amending Nasdaq Rule 4350 and adding Nasdaq IM-4350-8 to reflect an amendment made to NASD Rule 4350 by SR-NASD-2005-073. 10 10 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53578 (March 30, 2006), 71 FR 17532 (April 6, 2006) (SR-NASD-2005-073). • Amending Nasdaq Rules 4510 and 4520, deleting Nasdaq IM-4500-3, and adding new Nasdaq IM-4500-4, to reflect changes made by SR-NASD-2005-143 11 and SR-NASD-2006-047. 12 11 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52997 (December 22, 2005), 70 FR 77222 (December 29, 2005) (SR-NASD-2005-143). 12 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53696 (April 21, 2006), 71 FR 25273 (April 28, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-047). • Adding Nasdaq Rule 4613(a)(2) and

(3)and Nasdaq IM-4613 to restore a pilot program for supplemental MPIDs that had lapsed at the time of the approval of Nasdaq's exchange registration application but that was restored under NASD rules in SR-NASD-2006-004. 13 13 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53192 (January 30, 2006), 71 FR 6302 (February 7, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-004). Nasdaq notes that a further amendment to Rule 4613 was approved by the Commission in Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54155 (July 14, 2006), 71 FR 41291 (July 20, 2006) (SR-NASDAQ-2006-001), but with an implementation date of August 28, 2006. Accordingly, Nasdaq will file a technical rule change prior to that date to reflect the difference between the version of the rule adopted in this filing for the period prior to August 28, and the version to take effect on that date. Nasdaq is not at this time restoring the pilot for multiple MPIDs in non-Nasdaq stocks, since rules relating to such stocks are not operational. Rather, as part of the technical rule change referenced above, Nasdaq will expand the language of the pilot in Rule 4613 to cover non-Nasdaq stocks. • Amending Nasdaq Rules 4613, 4701, 4710, 4901, and 4904 to reflect changes made to corresponding NASD rules by SR-NASD-2005-150 and SR-NASD-2006-054. 14 14 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53017 (December 22, 2005), 70 FR 77225 (December 29, 2005) (SR-NASD-2005-150); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53739 (April 26, 2006), 71 FR 25876 (May 2, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-054). Nasdaq notes that a further amendment to these rules was approved by the Commission in Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54155 (July 14, 2006) (SR-NASDAQ-2006-001), but with an implementation date of August 28, 2006. Accordingly, Nasdaq will file a technical rule change prior to that date to reflect the difference between the version of the rule adopted in this filing for the period prior to August 28, and the version to take effect on that date. • Amending Nasdaq Rule 4710 to reflect a change made to NASD Rule 4710 by SR-NASD-2006-019. 15 15 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53233 (February 2, 2006), 71 FR 7100 (February 10, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-019). • Adopting Nasdaq Rule 4703 to reflect the adoption the Nasdaq Halt Cross (NASD Rule 4703) in SR-NASD-2005-015, 16 and making conforming changes to Nasdaq Rule 4704. 16 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53687 (April 20, 2006), 71 FR 24878 (April 27, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-015). • Adding Nasdaq Rule 4760, which reflects the recent adoption of the Nasdaq Crossing Network (NASD Rule 4716) in SR-NASD-2005-140. 17 17 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54101 (July 5, 2006), 71 FR 39382 (July 12, 2006) (SR-NASD-2005-140). • Amending Nasdaq Rule 4813 to reflect changes made to NASD Rule 4813 by SR-NASD-2005-153. 18 18 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53067 (January 6, 2006), 71 FR 2965 (January 18, 2006) (SR-NASD-2005-153). • Amending Nasdaq Rules 4714 and 4905 to reflect changes made to NASD Rules 4714 and 4905 by SR-NASD-2006-049. 19 19 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53675 (April 18, 2006), 71 FR 23975 (April 25, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-049). • Amending Nasdaq Rule 4912 to reflect changes made to NASD Rule 4912 by SR-NASD-2006-006. 20 20 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53187 (January 30, 2006), 71 FR 6116 (February 6, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-006). • Amending Nasdaq Rule 4953 to reflect changes made to NASD Rule 4953 by SR-NASD-2006-051 and SR-NASD-2006-017. 21 21 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53720 (April 25, 2006), 71 FR 25875 (May 2, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-051); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53316 (February 15, 2006), 71 FR 9401 (February 23, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-017). • Amending Nasdaq Rule 4962 to reflect changes made to NASD Rule 4962 by SR-NASD-2006-054 and SR-NASD-2006-016. 22 22 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53720 (April 26, 2006), 71 FR 25876 (May 2, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-054); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53203 (January 31, 2006), 71 FR 6300 (February 7, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-016). • Amending Nasdaq Rules 4360, 4410, 4450, 4619, 4620, and 4803 and Nasdaq IM-4351 to correct typographical errors. 2. Statutory Basis. Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act, 23 in general, and with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 24 in particular, in that the proposal is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The proposed rule change conforms the Rule 4000 Series of Nasdaq's rules to certain changes made to the Rule 4000 Series of the rules of NASD since approval of Nasdaq's rules by the Commission in January 2006 and corrects typographical errors in the approved rules. 23 15 U.S.C. 78f. 24 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 will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 25 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder 26 because the proposed rule change:

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

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

(3)does not become operative for 30 days from the date of filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 27 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 28 thereunder. 25 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 26 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 27 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 28 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). Nasdaq has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. 29 The Commission believes that the waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Waiver of the 30-day operative period will allow Nasdaq to implement these changes immediately so that they can be in place prior to the time when Nasdaq begins to operate as a national securities exchange. Accordingly, the Commission designates the proposal to be effective and operative upon filing with the Commission. 30 29 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 30 For the purposes only of waiving the operative date of this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in the furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-019 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-2006-019. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of Nasdaq. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-019 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 31 31 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12703 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54242; File No. SR-NASD-2006-083] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Revisions to the Series 27 Examination Program July 31, 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 14, 2006, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by NASD. NASD has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of the self-regulatory organization pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change NASD is filing revisions to the study outline and selection specifications for the Limited Principal—Financial and Operations (Series 27) examination program. 5 The proposed revisions update the material to reflect changes to the laws, rules and regulations covered by the examination and to better reflect the duties and responsibilities of a financial and operations principal. NASD is not proposing any textual changes to the By-Laws, Schedules to the By-Laws, or Rules of NASD. 5 NASD also is proposing corresponding revisions to the Series 27 question bank, but based upon instruction from the Commission staff, NASD is submitting SR-NASD-2006-083 for immediate effectiveness pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, and is not filing the question bank for Commission review. *See* letter to Alden S. Adkins, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, NASD Regulation, from Belinda Blaine, Associate Director, Division of Market Regulation (“Division”), Commission, dated July 24, 2000. The question bank is available for Commission review. The revised study outline is available on NASD's Web site ( *http://www.nasd.com* ), at NASD, and at the Commission. 6 The Series 27 selection specifications have been submitted to the Commission under separate cover with a request for confidential treatment pursuant to Rule 24b-2 under the Act. 7 6 Telephone conversation between Mia Zur, Special Counsel, Division, Commission, and Afshin Atabaki, Counsel, NASD, dated July 19, 2006. 7 17 CFR 240.24b-2. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, NASD 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. NASD has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Section 15A(g)(3) of the Act 8 requires NASD to prescribe standards of training, experience, and competence for persons associated with NASD members. In accordance with that provision, NASD has developed examinations, and administers examinations developed by other self-regulatory organizations, that are designed to establish that persons associated with NASD members have attained specified levels of competence and knowledge. NASD periodically reviews the content of the examinations to determine whether revisions are necessary or appropriate in view of changes pertaining to the subject matter covered by the examinations. 8 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(g)(3). Pursuant to NASD Rule 1022(b), members that have a minimum net capital requirement of $250,000 under SEC Rules 15c3-1(a)(1)(ii) 9 and 15c3-1(a)(2)(i), 10 as well as members that have a minimum net capital requirement of $150,000 under SEC Rule 15c3-1(a)(8), 11 are required to designate as a Limited Principal—Financial and Operations those individuals associated with them who are responsible for the members' financial and operational management, including, but not limited to, final approval and responsibility for the accuracy of financial reports submitted to regulators. In addition, Rule 1022(b) provides that the chief financial officer of such members must be a Limited Principal—Financial and Operations. The Series 27 examination is an NASD examination that qualifies an individual to function as a Limited Principal—Financial and Operations. 9 17 CFR 240.15c3-1(a)(1)(ii). 10 17 CFR 240.15c3-1(a)(2)(i). 11 17 CFR 240.15c3-1(a)(8). A committee of industry representatives, together with NASD staff, recently undertook a review of the Series 27 examination program. As a result of this review, NASD is proposing to make the following revisions to the study outline to reflect changes to the laws, rules and regulations covered by the examination and to better reflect the duties and responsibilities of a financial and operations principal. NASD is proposing to add sections on Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board Rules G-8(g) (Transactions in Municipal Fund Securities), G-14 (Reports of Sales and Purchases), G-15(f) (Minimum Denominations), G-15(g) (Forwarding Official Communications), G-17 (Conduct of Municipal Securities Activities), G-37 (Political Contributions and Prohibitions on Municipal Securities Business) and G-32(b) (Inter-Dealer Disclosure Requirements). NASD is proposing to add a section on SEC Regulation SHO, including Rules 200 (Definition of “Short Sale” and Marking Requirements) 12 and 203 (Borrowing and Delivery Requirements). 13 12 17 CFR 242.200. 13 17 CFR 242.203. NASD also is proposing to add sections on NASD Rules 1150 (Executive Representatives), 2350 (Broker-Dealer Conduct on the Premises of Financial Institutions), 2370 (Borrowing from or Lending to Customers), 3012 (Supervisory Control System), 3013 (Annual Certification of Compliance and Supervisory Processes), 3510 (Business Continuity Plan) and 9800 (Temporary Cease and Desist Orders). In addition, NASD is proposing to revise the study outline to remove the sections on NASD Rules 1110 (formerly Registration of Government Securities Principals and Representatives), 2320 (Best Execution and Interpositioning), 3370 (Purchases), 11100(d) (CUSIP Number), 11110 (Uniform Practice Committees), 11120 (Definitions), 11180 (formerly Use of Trade Acceptance and Reconciliation Service) and 11830 (formerly Mandatory Close-Out for Short Sales). Further, NASD is proposing to remove the following two subsections of the Insider Trading and Securities Fraud Enforcement Act of 1988 section: Investigatory Assistance to Foreign Securities Authorities and Cooperation with Foreign Authorities and International Organizations in Enforcement. NASD also is proposing to remove the sections on Form X17F-1A (Report for Missing, Lost, Stolen, or Counterfeit Securities), NASD Certificate of Incorporation and certain articles (Articles VII, XII, XIII and XV) of the NASD By-Laws. As a result of the revisions discussed above, the number of questions on several sections of the study outline were modified as follows: Keeping and Preservation of Records and Broker-Dealer Financial Reporting Requirements, decreased from 16 to 15 questions; Customer Protection, decreased from 37 to 36 questions; Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board Regulations, decreased from 10 to 9 questions; Uniform Practice Rules, decreased from 15 to 12 questions; and Other Relevant Regulations and Interpretations, increased from 15 to 21 questions. NASD also is proposing to change the title of Section 5 from “Federal Reserve Board Regulations” to “Extension of Credit in the Securities Industry.” NASD is proposing these changes to the entire content of the Series 27 examination, including the selection specifications and question bank. The number of questions on the Series 27 examination will remain at 145, and candidates will continue to have 31/2 hours to complete the exam. Also, each question will continue to count one point, and each candidate must correctly answer 70 percent of the questions to receive a passing grade. 2. Statutory Basis NASD believes that the proposed revisions to the Series 27 examination program are consistent with the provisions of Sections 15A(b)(6) 14 and 15A(g)(3) of the Act, 15 which authorize NASD to prescribe standards of training, experience, and competence for persons associated with NASD members. 14 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(6). 15 15 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(g)(3). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change 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 were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 16 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 17 in that the proposed rule change constitutes a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of the self-regulatory organization. NASD proposes to implement the revised Series 27 examination program on August 15, 2006. NASD will announce the implementation date in a *Notice to Members* to be published on the same date as this filing. 16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 17 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 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-NASD-2006-083 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-NASD-2006-083. 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 NASD. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-083 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 18 18 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12685 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54243; File No. SR-NASD-2006-084] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Revisions to the Series 28 Examination Program July 31, 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 14, 2006, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by NASD. NASD has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of the self-regulatory organization pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change NASD is filing revisions to the study outline and selection specifications for the Limited Principal—Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations (Series 28) examination program. 5 The proposed revisions update the material to reflect changes to the laws, rules and regulations covered by the examination and to better reflect the duties and responsibilities of an introducing broker-dealer financial and operations principal. NASD is not proposing any textual changes to the By-Laws, Schedules to the By-Laws, or Rules of NASD. 5 NASD also is proposing corresponding revisions to the Series 28 question bank, but based upon instruction from the Commission staff, NASD is submitting SR-NASD-2006-084 for immediate effectiveness pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, and is not filing the question bank for Commission review. *See* letter to Alden S. Adkins, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, NASD Regulation, from Belinda Blaine, Associate Director, Division of Market Regulation (“Division”), Commission, dated July 24, 2000. The question bank is available for Commission review. The revised study outline is available on NASD's Web site ( *http://www.nasd.com* ), at NASD, and at the Commission. 6 The Series 28 selection specifications have been submitted to the Commission under separate cover with a request for confidential treatment pursuant to Rule 24b-2 under the Act. 7 6 Telephone conversation between Mia Zur, Special Counsel, Division, Commission, and Afshin Atabaki, Counsel, NASD, dated July 19, 2006. 7 17 CFR 240.24b-2. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, NASD 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. NASD has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Section 15A(g)(3) of the Act 8 requires NASD to prescribe standards of training, experience, and competence for persons associated with NASD members. In accordance with that provision, NASD has developed examinations, and administers examinations developed by other self-regulatory organizations, that are designed to establish that persons associated with NASD members have attained specified levels of competence and knowledge. NASD periodically reviews the content of the examinations to determine whether revisions are necessary or appropriate in view of changes pertaining to the subject matter covered by the examinations. 8 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(g)(3). Pursuant to NASD Rule 1022(c), members that are subject to the net capital requirements of SEC Rule 15c3-1, 9 other than those members that are subject to the net capital requirements of SEC Rules 15c3-1(a)(1)(ii), 10 (a)(2)(i) 11 or (a)(8), 12 are required to designate as a Limited Principal—Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations those individuals associated with them who are responsible for the members' financial and operational management, including, but not limited to, final approval and responsibility for the accuracy of financial reports submitted to regulators. In addition, Rule 1022(c) provides that the chief financial officer of such members must be a Limited Principal—Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations. The Series 28 examination is an NASD examination that qualifies an individual to function as a Limited Principal—Introducing Broker-Dealer Financial and Operations. 9 17 CFR 240.15c3-1. 10 17 CFR 240.15c3-1(a)(1)(ii). 11 17 CFR 240.15c3-1(a)(2)(i). 12 17 CFR 240.15c3-1(a)(8). A committee of industry representatives, together with NASD staff, recently undertook a review of the Series 28 examination program. As a result of this review, NASD is proposing to make the following revisions to the study outline to reflect changes to the laws, rules and regulations covered by the examination and to better reflect the duties and responsibilities of an introducing broker-dealer financial and operations principal. NASD is proposing to add a section on Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board Rule G-37 (Political Contributions and Prohibitions on Municipal Securities Business). NASD also is proposing to add a section on SEC Regulation SHO, including Rules 200 (Definition of “Short Sale” and Marking Requirements) 13 and 203 (Borrowing and Delivery Requirements). 14 13 17 CFR 242.200. 14 17 CFR 242.203. NASD is proposing to add sections on NASD Rules 1150 (Executive Representatives), 2350 (Broker-Dealer Conduct on the Premises of Financial Institutions), 2370 (Borrowing from or Lending to Customers), 3012 (Supervisory Control System), 3013 (Annual Certification of Compliance and Supervisory Processes), 3510 (Business Continuity Plan) and 9800 (Temporary Cease and Desist Orders). In addition, NASD is proposing to revise the study outline to remove the sections on NASD Rules 1100 (Foreign Associates), 1110 (formerly Registration of Government Securities Principals and Representatives) and 2320 (Best Execution and Interpositioning). NASD also is proposing to remove the sections on Form X17F-1A (Report for Missing, Lost, Stolen, or Counterfeit Securities), NASD Certificate of Incorporation and certain articles (Articles VII, XII, XIII and XV) of the NASD By-Laws. Further, NASD is proposing to add a new section covering certain rules of the NASD Uniform Practice Code (“Uniform Practice Rules”). NASD is proposing to add the Uniform Practice Rules under Section 4 and to move the section on Other Relevant Regulations and Interpretations (formerly under Section 4) to Section 5, a new section. As a result of the revisions discussed above, the number of questions on several sections of the study outline were modified as follows: Keeping and Preservation of Records and Broker-Dealer Financial Reporting Requirements, increased from 15 to 16 questions; Uniform Practice Rules (new section), 5 questions; and Other Relevant Regulations and Interpretations, increased from 24 to 28 questions. NASD is proposing these changes to the entire content of the Series 28 examination, including the selection specifications and question bank. The number of questions on the Series 28 examination will increase from 85 to 95 questions. Candidates will continue to have 2 hours to complete the exam. Also, each question will continue to count one point, and each candidate must correctly answer 70 percent of the questions to receive a passing grade. 2. Statutory Basis NASD believes that the proposed revisions to the Series 28 examination program are consistent with the provisions of Sections 15A(b)(6) 15 and 15A(g)(3) of the Act, 16 which authorize NASD to prescribe standards of training, experience, and competence for persons associated with NASD members. 15 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(6). 16 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(g)(3). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change 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 were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 17 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 18 in that the proposed rule change constitutes a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of the self-regulatory organization. NASD proposes to implement the revised Series 28 examination program on August 15, 2006. NASD will announce the implementation date in a *Notice to Members* to be published on the same date as this filing. 17 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 18 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 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-NASD-2006-084 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-NASD-2006-084. 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 NASD. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-084 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2006. 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. E6-12686 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54244; File No. SR-NASD-2006-085] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Revisions to the Series 39 Examination Program July 31, 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 14, 2006, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by NASD. NASD has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of the self-regulatory organization pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change NASD is filing revisions to the study outline and selection specifications for the Limited Principal—Direct Participation Programs (Series 39) examination program. 5 The proposed revisions update the material to reflect changes to the laws, rules and regulations covered by the examination and to better reflect the duties and responsibilities of a direct participation programs principal. NASD is not proposing any textual changes to the By-Laws, Schedules to the By-Laws, or Rules of NASD. 5 NASD also is proposing corresponding revisions to the Series 39 question bank, but based upon instruction from the Commission staff, NASD is submitting SR-NASD-2006-085 for immediate effectiveness pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, and is not filing the question bank for Commission review. *See* letter to Alden S. Adkins, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, NASD Regulation, from Belinda Blaine, Associate Director, Division of Market Regulation (“Division”), Commission, dated July 24, 2000. The question bank is available for Commission review. The revised study outline is available on NASD's Web site ( *http://www.nasd.com* ), at NASD, and at the Commission. 6 The Series 39 selection specifications have been submitted to the Commission under separate cover with a request for confidential treatment pursuant to Rule 24b-2 under the Act. 7 6 Telephone conversation between Mia Zur, Special Counsel, Division, Commission, and Afshin Atabaki, Counsel, NASD, dated July 19, 2006. 7 17 CFR 240.24b-2. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, NASD 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. NASD has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Section 15A(g)(3) of the Act 8 requires NASD to prescribe standards of training, experience, and competence for persons associated with NASD members. In accordance with that provision, NASD has developed examinations, and administers examinations developed by other self-regulatory organizations, that are designed to establish that persons associated with NASD members have attained specified levels of competence and knowledge. NASD periodically reviews the content of the examinations to determine whether revisions are necessary or appropriate in view of changes pertaining to the subject matter covered by the examinations. 8 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(g)(3). Pursuant to NASD Rule 1022(e), an associated person of a member who meets the definition of principal in Rule 1021 may register with NASD as a Limited Principal—Direct Participation Programs if:

(1)The individual's activities in the investment banking and securities business are limited solely to the equity interests in or the debt of direct participation programs as defined in Rule 1022(e)(2);

(2)the individual also is registered as either a General Securities Representative (Series 7) or a Limited Representative—Direct Participation Programs (Series 22); and

(3)the individual passes the Series 39 qualification examination. A committee of industry representatives, together with NASD staff, recently undertook a review of the Series 39 examination program. As a result of this review, NASD is proposing to make the following revisions to the study outline to reflect changes to the laws, rules and regulations covered by the examination and to better reflect the duties and responsibilities of a direct participation programs principal. NASD is proposing to add a section on SEC Form S-1 registration. NASD also is proposing to add sections on NASD Rules 2370 (Borrowing from or Lending to Customers), 3012 (Supervisory Control System), 3013 (Annual Certification of Compliance and Supervisory Processes), 3510 (Business Continuity Plan) and 3520 (Emergency Contact Information). In addition, NASD is proposing to revise the study outline to remove the sections on Section 4(3) (Transactions by a dealer) under the Securities Act of 1933 9 and SEC Rule 174 (Delivery of prospectus by dealers; exemptions under Section 4(3)). 10 Further, NASD is proposing to remove the sections on NASD Rules 1040 (Registration of Assistant Representatives and Proctors), 1110 (formerly Registration of Government Securities Principals and Representatives) and 2750 (Transactions with Related Persons), as well as to remove the section on NASD Certificate of Incorporation. 9 15 U.S.C. 77d(3). 10 17 CFR 230.174. As a result of the revisions discussed above, the number of questions on each section of the study outline were modified as follows: Structure and Regulation of Direct Participation Program Offerings, decreased from 47 to 46 questions; Sales Supervision, General Supervision of Employees, Regulatory Framework of NASD, increased from 31 to 32 questions; and Compliance with Financial Responsibility Rules, increased from 17 to 22 questions. NASD is proposing these changes to the entire content of the Series 39 examination, including the selection specifications and question bank. The number of questions on the Series 39 examination will increase from 95 to 100 questions, and candidates will now have 21/4 hours (135 minutes) to complete the exam. Also, each question will continue to count one point, and each candidate must correctly answer 70 percent of the questions to receive a passing grade. 2. Statutory Basis NASD believes that the proposed revisions to the Series 39 examination program are consistent with the provisions of Sections 15A(b)(6) 11 and 15A(g)(3) of the Act, 12 which authorize NASD to prescribe standards of training, experience, and competence for persons associated with NASD members. 11 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(6). 12 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(g)(3). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change 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 were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 13 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 14 in that the proposed rule change constitutes a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of the self-regulatory organization. NASD proposes to implement the revised Series 39 examination program on August 15, 2006. NASD will announce the implementation date in a *Notice to Members* to be published on the same date as this filing. 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 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-NASD-2006-085 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-NASD-2006-085. 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 NASD. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-085 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2006. 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 Nancy M. Morris Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12688 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54245; File No. SR-NASD-2006-086] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Revisions to the Series 55 Examination Program July 31, 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 14, 2006, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by NASD. NASD has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of the self-regulatory organization pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change NASD is filing revisions to the study outline and selection specifications for the Limited Representative—Equity Trader (Series 55) examination program. 5 The proposed revisions update the material to reflect changes to the laws, rules and regulations covered by the examination and to better reflect the duties and responsibilities of an equity trader representative. NASD is not proposing any textual changes to the By-Laws, Schedules to the By-Laws, or Rules of NASD. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). 5 NASD also is proposing corresponding revisions to the Series 55 question bank, but based upon instruction from the Commission staff, NASD is submitting SR-NASD-2006-086 for immediate effectiveness pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, and is not filing the question bank for Commission review. *See* letter to Alden S. Adkins, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, NASD Regulation, from Belinda Blaine, Associate Director, Division of Market Regulation (“Division”), Commission, dated July 24, 2000. The question bank is available for Commission review. The revised study outline is available on NASD's Web site ( *www.nasd.com* ), at NASD, and at the Commission. 6 The Series 55 selection specifications have been submitted to the Commission under separate cover with a request for confidential treatment pursuant to Rule 24b-2 under the Act. 7 6 Telephone conversation between Mia Zur, Special Counsel, Division, Commission, and Afshin Atabaki, Counsel, NASD, dated July 19, 2006. 7 17 CFR 240.2-b-2. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, NASD 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. NASD has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Section 15A(g)(3) of the Act 8 requires NASD to prescribe standards of training, experience, and competence for persons associated with NASD members. In accordance with that provision, NASD has developed examinations, and administers examinations developed by other self-regulatory organizations, that are designed to establish that persons associated with NASD members have attained specified levels of competence and knowledge. NASD periodically reviews the content of the examinations to determine whether revisions are necessary or appropriate in view of changes pertaining to the subject matter covered by the examinations. 8 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(g)(3). Pursuant to NASD Rule 1032(f), the Series 55 examination is required, with certain limited exceptions, for associated persons who are engaged in or directly supervise proprietary trading or the execution of transactions on an agency basis with respect to transactions in equity, preferred or convertible debt securities effected otherwise than on a securities exchange. There is an exception from the Series 55 examination requirement for any person associated with a member whose trading activities are conducted principally on behalf of an investment company that is registered with the Commission pursuant to the Investment Company Act of 1940 and that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with the member. A committee of industry representatives, together with NASD staff, recently undertook a review of the Series 55 examination program. As a result of this review, NASD is proposing to make the following revisions to the study outline to reflect changes to the laws, rules and regulations covered by the examination and to better reflect the duties and responsibilities of an equity trader representative. NASD is proposing to add a section on Rules 600 (NMS Security Designation and Definitions), 9 602 (Dissemination of Quotations in NMS Securities), 10 604 (Display of Customer Limit Orders), 11 605 (Disclosure of Order Execution Information), 12 606 (Disclosure of Order Routing Information) 13 and 612 (Minimum Price Increments) 14 of SEC Regulation NMS. NASD also is proposing to add sections on NASD Rules 2111 (Trading Ahead of Customer Market Orders) and 3380 (Order Entry and Execution Practices). NASD further is proposing to modify the section on the NASDAQ Market Center—Execution Services to add specific references to NASD Rules 4701(Definitions), 4704 (Opening Process for NASDAQ-Listed Securities), 4706 (Order Entry Parameters), 4707 (Entry and Display of Quotes/Orders), 4709 (NASDAQ Closing Cross), 4710 (Participant Obligations in the NASDAQ Market Center), 4714 (Routing NASDAQ-Listed Securities), 4715 (Adjustment of Open Quotes and/or Orders) and 4719 (Anonymity). 9 17 CFR 242.600. 10 17 CFR 242.602. 11 17 CFR 242.604. 12 17 CFR 242.605. 13 17 CFR 242.606. 14 17 CFR 242.612. NASD is proposing to add a section on the NASDAQ Initial Public Offering Process (NASDAQ Head Trader Alert 2005-096) and to modify the section on SEC Regulation SHO to add specific references to Rules 200 (Definition of “Short Sale” and Marking Requirements) 15 and 203 (Borrowing and Delivery Requirements). 16 Further, NASD is proposing to add references to the specific types of NASDAQ securities covered by the Series 55 examination, add two additional modifiers (.ST (Pre-Open and Aftermarket Trades Not Reported Within 90 Seconds) and .W (Stop Orders)) to the list of Trade Reporting Service modifiers and add a section on reporting cancelled trades. 15 17 CFR 242.200. 16 17 CFR 242.203. In addition, NASD is proposing to revise the study outline to remove the following sections: SEC Rules 11Ac1-1 (formerly Dissemination of Quotations), 17 11Ac1-4 (formerly Display of Customer Limit Orders), 18 11Ac1-5 (formerly Disclosure of Order Execution Information) 19 and 11Ac1-6 (formerly Disclosure of Order Routing Information); 20 NASDAQ Levels 1, 2 and 3 Service; SEC Rule 10b-10 (Confirmation of Transactions); 21 and NASD Rules 3360 (Short Interest Reporting), 3370 (Purchases) and 4643 (Customer Confirmations). 17 17 CFR 240.11Ac1-1. 18 17 CFR 240.11Ac1-4. 19 17 CFR 240.11Ac1-5. 20 17 CFR 240.11Ac1-6. 21 17 CFR 240.10b-10. As a result of the revisions discussed above, the number of questions on each section of the study outline were modified as follows: NASDAQ and Over-The-Counter Markets, decreased from 42 to 41 questions; NASDAQ Display, Execution and Trading Systems, increased from 15 to 17 questions; Trade Reporting Requirements, increased from 16 to 19 questions; and General Industry Standards, decreased from 27 to 23 questions. NASD is proposing these changes to the entire content of the Series 55 examination, including the selection specifications and question bank. The number of questions on the Series 55 examination will remain at 100, and candidates will continue to have 3 hours to complete the exam. Also, each question will continue to count one point, and each candidate must correctly answer 70 percent of the questions to receive a passing grade. 2. Statutory Basis NASD believes that the proposed revisions to the Series 55 examination program are consistent with the provisions of Sections 15A(b)(6) 22 and 15A(g)(3) of the Act, 23 which authorize NASD to prescribe standards of training, experience, and competence for persons associated with NASD members. 22 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(6). 23 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(g)(3). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change 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 were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 24 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 25 in that the proposed rule change constitutes a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of the self-regulatory organization. NASD proposes to implement the revised Series 55 examination program on August 15, 2006. NASD will announce the implementation date in a *Notice to Members* to be published on the same date as this filing. 24 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 25 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 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-NASD-2006-086 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-NASD-2006-086. 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 NASD. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-086 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 26 26 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12704 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54256; File No. SR-NASD-2006-087] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to NASD Rule 5110 and Certain Other NASD Rules Amended Pursuant to SR-NASD-2005-087 August 1, 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 20, 2006, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the NASD. The NASD filed the proposed rules change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposed rule change effective upon filing with the Commission. NASD proposes to make the proposed rule change operative on the date on which the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq Exchange”) commences operation as a national securities exchange for Nasdaq-listed securities. 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). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 5 These securities will not include approximately 40 securities that are dually-listed on the New York Stock Exchange. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The NASD proposes to

(1)amend NASD Rule 5110 to clarify that the rule is applicable to both Nasdaq and non-Nasdaq exchange-listed securities; and

(2)make technical, non-substantive changes to certain other NASD rules that were amended by proposed rule change SR-NASD-2005-087. 6 Rule 5110 and the other amendments to NASD rules proposed by SR-NASD-2005-087 will become effective on the date upon which the Nasdaq Exchange operates as a national securities exchange for Nasdaq-listed securities. Currently, that date is projected to be August 1, 2006. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the NASD's Web site ( *http://www.nasd.com* ), at NASD's principal office, at the Commission's Public Reference Room. 6 The NASD filed SR-NASD-2005-087 on July 11, 2005 and Amendment No. 1 on June 15, 2006. The Commission approved SR-NASD-2005-087, as amended, on June 30, 2006. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54084 (June 30, 2006), 71 FR 38935 (July 10, 2006) (“June 30 Approval Order”). 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 NASD 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 NASD has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose On June 30, 2006, the Commission approved SR-NASD-2005-087. 7 Among other things, in SR-NASD-2005-087, the NASD proposed

(1)amendments to the NASD Delegation Plan, NASD By-Laws and NASD rules to reflect a proposed phased implementation strategy for the operation of the Nasdaq Exchange as a national securities exchange with respect to Nasdaq-listed securities during a transitional period; and

(2)rules for reporting transactions effected otherwise than on an exchange to the new Trade Reporting Facility. The NASD is filing this proposed rule change in anticipation of SR-NASD-2005-087 becoming effective to

(1)amend Rule 5110 to clarify that the rule is applicable to both Nasdaq and non-Nasdaq exchange-listed securities; and

(2)make technical, non-substantive changes to certain other NASD rules that were amended by SR-NASD-2005-087. 7 *Id.* Amendments to Rule 5110 Pursuant to SR-NASD-2005-087, NASD proposed to renumber Rule 6440(i) as Rule 5110 and extend its application to Nasdaq exchange-listed securities. Currently, the rule prohibits members from executing, otherwise than on an exchange, a transaction in a security subject to an initial public offering until such security has first opened for trading on the national securities exchange listing the security, as indicated by the dissemination of an opening transaction in the security by the listing exchange via the Consolidated Tape. As described in footnote 23 of the June 30 Approval Order, the NASD is proposing to amend Rule 5110 to delete the reference to dissemination of the opening transaction “via the Consolidated Tape.” Pursuant to SR- NASD-2005-087, Rule 5110 is intended to apply to both Nasdaq and non-Nasdaq exchange-listed securities. As such, the reference in the rule to the Consolidated Tape is too narrow given that transactions in securities listed on the Nasdaq Exchange are reported to the Nasdaq Unlisted Trading Privileges Plan. Technical, Non-Substantive Amendments NASD is proposing a number of grammatical and technical, non-substantive changes to certain NASD rules that were amended by SR-NASD-2005-087. Rules 4120A, 4633 and 6431 give NASD authority to halt trading on the ADF and trading reported to the Trade Reporting Facility, with respect to Nasdaq-listed securities, and trading otherwise than on an exchange with respect to non-Nasdaq exchange-listed securities, respectively. These rules are intended to be consistent in their language and application. Accordingly, NASD is proposing to amend Rule 4633(a)(2)(C)(i) and

(ii)and Rule 6431(a)(2)(C)(i) and

(ii)by replacing the word “believes” with the word “determines.” The proposed change would conform the language of these rules to the language of Rule 4120A(a)(2)(C)(i) and (ii). 8 8 Specifically, each rule grants NASD authority to halt trades in a particular security, including in the event of extraordinary market activity in the security. Rule 4120A(a)(2)(C)(i) and

(ii)provides that NASD may exercise this authority if it “determines” that such activity is caused by the misuse or malfunction of a system operated by or linked to NASD or a national securities exchange. In otherwise identical provisions, Rule 4633(a)(2)(C)(i) and

(ii)and Rule 6431(a)(2)(C)(i) and

(ii)use the word “believes” instead of “determines.” NASD is also proposing to amend Rule 4633 to change references to trading halts “on” or “in” the Trade Reporting Facility to “reported to” the Trade Reporting Facility, to clarify that trades are not executed on the Trade Reporting Facility. In addition, SR-NASD-2005-087 inadvertently renumbered subparagraphs

(MM)through

(PP)of Rule 2860(b)(2) as

(KK)through (OO). These subparagraphs should have been renumbered

(KK)through (NN). As a result, there currently is no subparagraph (OO). Therefore, the proposed rule change would renumber the rule's subparagraphs

(PP)through

(AAA)as

(OO)through (ZZ). Finally, several rule changes that were approved by the Commission and implemented subsequent to the filing of Amendment No. 1 to SR-NASD-2005-087 change the underlying or proposed text provided in Exhibit 5 of SR-NASD-2005-087. As a result, NASD is proposing changes to the rule text approved pursuant to SR-NASD-2005-087 to make it consistent with the other recently approved rule changes. These include the following rule changes along with the rules affected: SR-NASD-2000-023 amended Rules 6951 and 6954; SR-NASD-2005-098 amended Rule 6740 (renumbered as Rule 6640 pursuant to SR-NASD-2005-087); SR-NASD-2006-040 amended Rule 9610; and SR-NASD-2006-080 amended Rule 4901. In addition, the “Nasdaq National Market” was recently renamed the “Nasdaq Global Market,” and pursuant to SR-NASD-2006-068, a number of rules were amended to change “Nasdaq National Market,” “NNM” or “Nasdaq National Market securities” to “Nasdaq Global Market,” “NGM” or “Nasdaq Global Market securities,” respectively. 2. Statutory Basis NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, 9 which requires, among other things, that NASD rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. NASD believes that the proposed rule change relating to Rule 5110 will result in uniform regulation of securities that are subject to an initial public offering. In addition, NASD believes that the proposed rule change will enhance the integrity of the market by increasing the consistency and clarity of its rules. 9 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:

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

(ii)Impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)Become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate 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, 10 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 11 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. 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 12 normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), 13 the Commission may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The NASD has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day pre-operative delay. The Commission believes that such waiver is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because it would allow the NASD to update and clarify its rules. 14 For this reason, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be operative on the date that the Nasdaq Exchange begins operations as a national securities exchange for Nasdaq-listed securities. 15 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 14 For purposes only of accelerating the operative date of this proposal, the Commission has considered the rule's impact on efficiency, competition and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 15 As noted above, the Nasdaq Exchange is currently scheduled to commence operating as a national securities exchange with respect to Nasdaq-listed securities on August 1, 2006. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NASD-2006-087 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-087. 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 NASD. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-087 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 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. E6-12738 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54258; File No. SR-NASD-2006-080] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Extend the Time for Non-Member Broker/Dealers To Access the Brut and INET Facilities August 1, 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 3, 2006, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”), through its subsidiary, The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (“Nasdaq”), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by Nasdaq. On July 5, 2006, Nasdaq filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 Nasdaq filed the proposed rule change as a “non-controversial” rule change under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 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 In Amendment No. 1, Nasdaq revised the proposed rule text to conform it with the existing language of NASD Rule 4901. 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 5 Nasdaq has requested the Commission to waive the 30-day pre-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 Nasdaq proposes to continue the participation of broker/dealers that are non-NASD members in Nasdaq's Brut and INET systems through the earlier of September 1, 2006, or the date Nasdaq becomes operational as a national securities exchange for the particular types of securities traded by those non-members in Nasdaq's INET and Brut systems. The purpose of the proposed rule change is to allow the non-NASD member broker/dealers to have continued access to the Brut and INET systems while they take actions to become members of The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq Exchange”). 6 Nasdaq would implement the proposed rule change immediately. The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new language is in *italics* . Proposed deletions are in [brackets]. 6 The Commission recently approved Nasdaq's application for one of its proposed subsidiaries, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, to be registered as a national securities exchange under Section 6 of the Act. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53128 (January 13, 2006), 71 FR 3550 (January 23, 2006) (File No. 10-131). 4901. Definitions Unless stated otherwise, the terms described below shall have the following meaning:

(a)through

(h)No change

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

(j)through

(w)No Change 4952. System Participant Registration

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

(6)In addition to the above, all System Participants shall be members of the Association. Exception: Non-NASD member broker/dealers shall have access to System until the earlier of either [July] *September* 1, 2006, or the date that Nasdaq becomes operational as a national securities exchange for the particular class of securities traded by the non-NASD member. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change 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, Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Nasdaq states that, under current rules, broker/dealers that are not members of the NASD may use the Brut and INET systems until July 1, 2006. Nasdaq is proposing to modify this provision to allow non-NASD member broker/dealers to use the Brut and INET systems until the earlier of either September 1, 2006, or the date that Nasdaq becomes operational as a national securities exchange for the particular class of securities traded by the non-member. Nasdaq believes that this division of dates upon which non-NASD members must be members of the Nasdaq Exchange in order to continue to use Nasdaq's trading facilities is necessary because Nasdaq plans to become operational as a national securities exchange in two phases, with the first involving only Nasdaq securities and a second, subsequent phase involving securities listed by other national securities exchanges. Under the proposal, non-NASD members trading Nasdaq-listed securities would be required to be a Nasdaq Exchange member to continue to trade Nasdaq securities in Brut and INET on the date that Nasdaq becomes operational as a national securities exchange for Nasdaq issues, while entities trading other exchange-listed securities would be allowed continued access to the Brut and INET systems for such trading until such time as Nasdaq becomes operational as a national securities exchange for non-Nasdaq issues. Nasdaq states that in neither scenario would non-NASD member access to the Brut and INET systems extend beyond September 1, 2006 without a further extension. Nasdaq states that this extension is intended to allow these non-NASD member broker/dealers to have continued access to Brut and INET while they take actions to become members of the recently-approved Nasdaq Exchange. Nasdaq notes that only 44 non-NASD member broker/dealers currently have access to its Brut and INET systems (4 in the Brut system and 40 in the INET system) and, as before, Nasdaq commits not to allow any additional non-NASD broker/dealers access during this extension period. 2. Statutory Basis Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A of the Act, 7 in general, and with Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, 8 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and to remove impediments to a free and open market and a national market system. 7 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3. 8 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(6). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others Nasdaq states that written comments were neither solicited nor received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the proposed rule change does not:

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

(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)by its terms, 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 9 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder. 10 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to thirty days after the date of filing. 11 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 12 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Nasdaq has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-operative delay and the five-day pre-filing notice requirement and designate the proposed rule change to become effective upon filing. Nasdaq believes that waivers of such periods will allow continued uninterrupted access to the Brut and INET systems for non-member broker/dealers in the period of time immediately preceding Nasdaq's operation as a national securities exchange. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day pre-operative delay and the five-day pre-filing notice requirement is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because it would facilitate the orderly transition of Nasdaq to become a national securities exchange, thus removing impediments to a free and open market and a national market system. In addition, the Commission believes that waiving the 30-day pre-operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because such waiver would allow non-NASD member broker/dealers to continue to participate in Brut and INET while they take actions to become members of the Nasdaq Exchange. For the foregoing reasons, the Commission designates the proposal to become effective and operative immediately. 13 11 *See* 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 12 *Id.* 13 For purposes only of accelerating the operative date of this proposal, the Commission has considered the impact of the proposed rule on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within sixty days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in the furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 14 14 The effective date of the original proposed rule change is July 3, 2006, and the effective date of Amendment No. 1 is July 5, 2006. For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposal, the Commission considers the period to commence on July 5, 2006, the date on which the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NASD-2006-080 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-080. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of Nasdaq. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-080 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12739 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54232; File No. SR-NYSE-2004-56] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange Inc. (n/k/a New York Stock Exchange LLC); Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Amendments to Exchange Rule 611, “Disqualification or Other Disability of Arbitrators” July 27, 2006. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, notice is hereby given that on October 12, 2004, the New York Stock Exchange Inc. (n/k/a New York Stock Exchange LLC) (“NYSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed amendments to its arbitration rules as described in Items I and II below, which items have been prepared by the Exchange. On May 26, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change (“Amendment No. 1”). 3 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. 3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange amended the filing to note that the need to remove an arbitrator might arise not only for a failure to disclose an item that should have been disclosed, but also if a conflict arises after the commencement of the hearing. The Exchange also amended the filing and the rule text to remove the Director of Arbitration's discretion to limit the additional information requested of an arbitrator. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The proposed rule change, as amended, consists of amendments to Rule 611 concerning the disqualification of arbitrators. 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 the proposed rule change is available on the NYSE's Web site ( *www.NYSE.com* ), at the NYSE's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. 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 Once an arbitrator has taken the Oath of Arbitrators for a particular case, NYSE rules do not currently provide for the Director of Arbitration to remove an arbitrator from serving on that case. The need for such action could arise if, for example, an item that should have been disclosed by the arbitrator pursuant to Exchange rules had inadvertently not been disclosed or a conflict arises after commencement of the hearing. Historically, when this situation has arisen, the remedy has been for the arbitrator to recuse himself or herself. Nevertheless, the Exchange believes that it would be prudent to give the Director of Arbitration the authority to remove an arbitrator should a conflict come to the attention of the parties or the Exchange that for whatever reason was not appropriately disclosed pursuant to NYSE rules. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) 4 of the Act in that it promotes just and equitable principles of trade by ensuring that members and member organizations and the public have a fair and impartial forum for the resolution of their disputes. 4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period

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

(ii)as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will: a. By order approve the proposed rule change, or b. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act. We solicit specific comment on whether the language of the proposed rule, as amended, clearly indicates that conflicts arising after the commencement of the hearing could give rise to removal of an arbitrator by the Director of Arbitration. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2004-56 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2004-56. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the NYSE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2004-56 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 5 5 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12702 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54251; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2006-18] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Relating to the Trading of the Index-Linked Securities of Barclays Bank PLC Linked to the Performance of the Goldman Sachs Crude Oil Total Return Index TM Pursuant to Unlisted Trading Privileges July 31, 2006 Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on May 16, 2006, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“Exchange”), through its wholly owned subsidiary NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. (“NYSE Arca Equities” or the “Corporation”), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. On July 27, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The Commission is publishing this notice and order to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons and is approving the proposal on an accelerated basis. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange clarified certain aspects of its proposal regarding the Securities and surveillance. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Through NYSE Arca Equities, the Exchange proposes to amend its rules governing NYSE Arca, L.L.C. (also referred to as the “NYSE Arca Marketplace”), the equities trading facility of NYSE Arca Equities. Pursuant to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6), the Exchange proposes to trade pursuant to unlisted trading privileges (“UTP”) the Index-Linked Securities (“Securities”) of Barclays Bank PLC (“Barclays”), which are linked to the performance of the Goldman Sachs Crude Oil Total Return Index TM (“Index”). II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item III below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Pursuant to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6), the Exchange proposes to trade pursuant to UTP the Securities of Barclays, which are linked to the performance of the Index. Barclays intends to issue the Securities under the name “iPathSM Exchange-Traded Notes.” A rule proposal for the original listing and trading of the Securities was filed with the Commission by the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (“NYSE”) 4 and approved by the Commission. 5 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53967 (June 9, 2006), 71 FR 34976 (June 16, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2006-19) (the “NYSE Proposal”). 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54177 (July 19, 2006), 71 FR 54177 (July 27, 2006) (the “NYSE Order”).

(a)The Securities and the Index

(i)The Securities In August 2005, the Commission approved NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6), which provides general standards for the listing and trading of “Index-Linked Securities.” 6 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. As permitted in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6), the Exchange is submitting this rule proposal to the Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, to obtain Commission approval to trade the Securities pursuant to UTP. 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52204 (August 3, 2005), 70 FR 46559 (August 10, 2005) (SR-PCX-2005-63). A description of the Securities and the Index is set forth in the NYSE Proposal. 7 The Securities are a series of medium-term debt securities of Barclays that provide for a cash payment at maturity, or upon earlier exchange at the holder's option, based on the performance of the Index subject to the adjustments described below. 7 *See supra* note 4. The Securities will not have a minimum principal amount that will be repaid and, accordingly, payment on the Securities prior to or at maturity may be less than the original issue price of the Securities. In fact, the value of the Index must increase for the investor to receive at least the $50 principal amount per Security at maturity or upon exchange or redemption. If the value of the Index decreases or does not increase sufficiently to offset the investor fee, 8 the investor will receive less, and possibly significantly less, than the $50 principal amount per Security. In addition, holders of the Securities will not receive any interest payments from the Securities. The Securities will have a term of 30 years and are not callable. 9 8 The investor fee is equal to 0.75% per year times the principal amount of a holder's Securities times the index factor, calculated on a daily basis in the following manner. The investor fee on the date of issuance of the Securities will equal zero. On each subsequent calendar day until maturity or early redemption, the investor fee will increase by an amount equal to 0.75% times the principal amount of a holder's Securities times the index factor on that day (or, if such day is not a trading day, the index factor on the immediately preceding trading day) divided by 365. The investor fee is the only fee holders will be charged in connection with their ownership of the Securities. 9 Telephone conference between John Carey, Assistant General Counsel, NYSE Group, Inc., and Florence Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation (“Division”), Commission, on July 12, 2006. Holders who have not previously redeemed their Securities will receive a cash payment at maturity equal to the principal amount of their Securities times the index factor 10 on the Final Valuation Date 11 minus the investor fee on the Final Valuation Date. 10 The “index factor” on any given day will be equal to the closing value of the Index on that day divided by the initial index level. The index factor on the Final Valuation Date will be equal to the final index level divided by the initial index level. The “initial index level” is the closing value of the Index on the date of issuance of the Securities (the “Trade Date”) and the “final index level” is the closing value of the Index on the Final Valuation Date. Telephone conference between John Carey, Assistant General Counsel, NYSE Group, Inc., and Florence Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, Division, Commission, on July 14, 2006. 11 The “Final Valuation Date” is the last Thursday before maturity of the Securities. Prior to maturity, holders may, subject to certain restrictions, 12 redeem their Securities on any Redemption Date 13 during the term of the Securities provided that they present at least 50,000 Securities for redemption, or they act through a broker or other financial intermediaries (such as a bank or other financial institution not required to register as a broker-dealer to engage in securities transactions) that are willing to bundle their Securities for redemption with other investors' Securities. If a holder chooses to redeem such holder's Securities, the holder will receive a cash payment on the applicable Redemption Date equal to the principal amount of such holder's Securities times the index factor on the applicable Valuation Date minus the investor fee on the applicable Valuation Date. To redeem their Securities, holders must instruct their broker or other person through whom they hold their Securities to follow certain procedures as described in the NYSE Proposal. 14 12 Telephone conference between John Carey, Assistant General Counsel, NYSE Group, Inc., and Florence Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, Division, Commission, on July 13, 2006. 13 A “Redemption Date” is the third business day following a Valuation Date (other than the Final Valuation Date). A “Valuation Date” is each Thursday from the first Thursday after issuance of the Securities until the last Thursday before the Final Valuation Date inclusive (or, if such date is not a trading day, the next succeeding trading day). 14 If holders elect to redeem their Securities, Barclays may request that Barclays Capital Inc. (a broker-dealer) purchase the Securities for the cash amount that would otherwise have been payable by Barclays upon redemption. In this case, Barclays will remain obligated to redeem the Securities if Barclays Capital Inc. fails to purchase the Securities. Any Securities purchased by Barclays Capital Inc. may remain outstanding. If an event of default occurs and the maturity of the Securities is accelerated, Barclays will pay the default amount in respect of the principal of the Securities at maturity. 15 More information regarding default procedures, including a quotation period and an objection period, is set forth in the NYSE Proposal. 15 That cost will equal:

(i)The lowest amount that a qualified financial institution would charge to effect this assumption or undertaking, plus

(ii)the reasonable expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by the holders of the Securities in preparing any documentation necessary for this assumption or undertaking.

(ii)The Index The Index is a sub-index of the GSCI ® and reflects the excess returns that are potentially available through an unleveraged investment in the contracts comprising the relevant components of the Index (which currently includes only the West Texas Intermediate (“WTI”) crude oil futures contract traded on the New York Mercantile Exchange (“NYMEX”)), plus the Treasury Bill rate of interest that could be earned on funds committed to the trading of the underlying contracts. 16 The value of the Index, on any given day, reflects:

(i)The price levels of the contracts included in the Goldman Sachs Crude Oil Total Return Index TM (which represents the value of the Goldman Sachs Crude Oil Total Return Index TM );

(ii)the “contract daily return,” which is the percentage change in the total dollar weight of the Goldman Sachs Crude Oil Total Return Index TM from the previous day to the current day; and

(iii)the Treasury Bill rate of interest that could be earned on funds committed to the trading of the underlying contracts. 16 The Treasury Bill rate of interest used for purposes of calculating the index on any day is the 91-day auction high rate for U.S. Treasury Bills, as reported on Telerate page 56, or any successor page, on the most recent of the weekly auction dates prior to such day. In addition to other criteria described in the NYSE Proposal, in order to qualify for inclusion in the Index the contract must be related to WTI crude oil. As presently constituted, the only contract used to calculate the Index is the WTI crude oil futures contract traded on the NYMEX. The GSCI ®, upon which the Index is based, is a proprietary index on a production-weighted basket of futures contracts on physical commodities traded on trading facilities in major industrialized countries. The GSCI ® is designed to be a measure of the performance over time of the markets for these commodities. The commodities represented in the GSCI ® are weighted, on a production basis, to reflect their relative significance (in the view of the Index Sponsor, in consultation with the Policy Committee) 17 to the world economy. The fluctuations in the value of the GSCI ® are intended generally to correlate with changes in the prices of such physical commodities in global markets. The value of the GSCI ® has been normalized such that its hypothetical level on January 2, 1970 was 100. Futures contracts on the GSCI ®, and options on such futures contracts, are currently listed for trading on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. More information regarding the operation, calculation methodology, weighting, and historical performance of the Index is set forth in the NYSE Proposal. 17 The Index Sponsor has established a Policy Committee to assist it with the operation of the GSCI ®. The Policy Committee is described in more detail in the NYSE Proposal.

(b)Dissemination and Availability of Information

(i)The Intraday Indicative Value According to the NYSE Proposal, an “Intraday Indicative Value” (or “IIV”) meant to approximate the intrinsic economic value of the Securities will be calculated and published via the facilities of the Consolidated Tape Association (“CTA”) every 15 seconds from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern Time (“ET”) on each day on which the Securities are traded on the NYSE. 18 Additionally, Barclays or an affiliate will calculate and publish the closing IIV of the Securities on each trading day at *http://www.ipathetn.com.* In connection with the Securities, the term “IIV” refers to the value at a given time determined based on the following equation: IIV = Principal Amount per Unit ($50) multiplied by (Current Index Level divided by Initial Index Level ) 19 minus Current Investor Fee. 20 18 The IIV calculation will be provided for reference purposes only. 19 The Current Index Level is the most recent published level of the Index as reported by the Index Sponsor, whereas the Initial Index Level is the Index level on the trade date for the Securities. 20 The Current Investor Fee is the most recent daily calculation of the investor fee with respect to the Securities, determined as described above (which, during any trading day, will be the investor fee determined on the preceding calendar day). The IIV will not reflect price changes to the price of an underlying commodity between the close of trading of the futures contract at the relevant futures exchange and 4 p.m. ET. The value of the Securities may accordingly be influenced by non-concurrent trading hours between the Exchange and NYMEX. The WTI crude oil futures (the futures contracts underlying the Index) will trade on the NYMEX from 10 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. ET. While the market for futures trading for each of the Index commodities is open, the IIV can be expected to closely approximate the redemption value of the Securities. However, during NYSE Arca Marketplace trading hours when the futures contracts have ceased trading, spreads and resulting premiums or discounts may widen, and therefore, increase the difference between the price of the Securities and their redemption value. The IIV should not be viewed as a real time update of the redemption value.

(ii)The Index According to the NYSE Proposal, the Index Sponsor makes the official calculations of the GSCI ®. At present, this calculation is performed continuously and is reported on Reuters page GSCI ® (or any successor or replacement page) and is updated on Reuters at least once every 15 seconds 21 during business hours on each day on which the offices of the Index Sponsor in New York City are open for business (a “GSCI Business Day”). 22 The settlement price for the Index is also reported on Reuters page GSCI ® (or any successor or replacement page) on each GSCI Business Day between 4 p.m. and 6 p.m., New York time. 21 Telephone conference between John Carey, Assistant General Counsel, NYSE Group, Inc., and Florence Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, Division, Commission, on July 27, 2006 (clarifying that the Index value will be disseminated at least every 15 seconds, not every 3 minutes, during the time the Securities trade on the Exchange). 22 Both NYSE, as the listing exchange, and NYSE Arca, will not permit trading in the Securities if certain information about the Index value is not disseminated on, for example, a date that is not a GSCI Business Day. *See supra.*

(c)UTP Trading Criteria The Exchange will cease trading in the Securities if:

(1)The listing market stops trading the Securities because of a regulatory halt similar to a halt based on NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.12 or a halt because the IIV or the value of the underlying Index is no longer available on at least a 15 second delayed basis; or

(2)the listing market delists the Securities. 23 In the event that the Exchange is open for business on a day that is not a GSCI Business Day, the Exchange will not permit trading of the Securities on that day. Additionally, the Exchange may cease trading the Securities if such other event shall occur or condition exists which, in the opinion of the Exchange, makes further dealings on the Exchange inadvisable. 23 E-mail between Janet Kissane, Assistant General Counsel, NYSE Group, Inc., and Florence Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, Division, Commission, dated July 31, 2006 (clarifying that the Securities will cease trading during all trading hours).

(d)Trading Rules The Exchange deems the Securities to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Securities subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. Trading in the Securities on the NYSE Arca Marketplace will occur from 4 a.m. to 8 p.m. ET in accordance with NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.34(a). 24 The Exchange has appropriate rules to facilitate transactions in the Securities during all trading sessions. The minimum trading increment for Securities on the Exchange will be $0.01. 24 During all NYSE Arca Equities trading sessions, the Exchange represents that if the official Index Sponsor calculates an updated Index value, then such value will be updated and disseminated at least every 15 seconds during such trading session, and always will be so during the Exchange's core trading session (although during this session, the Exchange may rely on the listing exchange to monitor such calculation and dissemination). The Exchange represents that the official Index Sponsor calculates and disseminates the Index value from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET. Because this product is not in continuous distribution, an IIV is not required to be disseminated at least every 15 seconds in all trading sessions; however, because of the weekly redemption process for this product, such dissemination of the IIV is required during the Exchange's core trading session. The Exchange may rely on the listing market to monitor such dissemination of the IIV during the Exchange's core trading session. Telephone conference between John Carey, Assistant General Counsel, NYSE Group, Inc., and Florence Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, Division, Commission, on July 12, 2006. Further, the Exchange has recently adopted new Commentary .01 to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6), which sets forth certain restrictions on ETP Holders acting as registered Market Makers in the Securities to facilitate surveillance. 25 Commentary .01(b)-(c) to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6) requires that the ETP Holder acting as a registered Market Maker in the Securities provide the Exchange with necessary information relating to its trading in the Index components, the commodities underlying the Index components, or options, futures or options on futures on the Index, or any other derivatives (collectively, “derivative instruments”) based on the Index or based on any Index component or any physical commodity underlying an Index component. Commentary .01(d) to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6) prohibits the ETP Holder acting as a registered Market Maker in the Securities from using any material nonpublic information received from any person associated with an ETP Holder or employee of such person regarding trading by such person or employee in the Index components, the commodities underlying the Index components, or any derivative instruments based on the Index or based on any Index component or any physical commodity underlying an Index component (including the Securities). In addition, Commentary .01(a) to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6) prohibits the ETP Holder acting as a registered Market Maker in the Securities from being affiliated with a market maker in the Index components, the commodities underlying the Index components, or any derivative instruments based on the Index or based on any Index component or any physical commodity underlying an Index component unless adequate information barriers are in place, as provided in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.26. 25 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54189 (July 21, 2006), 71 FR 43263 (July 31, 2006) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-17). With respect to trading halts, the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt or suspend trading in the Securities. Trading in the Securities may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the Securities inadvisable. These may include:

(1)The extent to which trading is not occurring in the Index components or

(2)whether other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present. In addition, trading in Securities will be subject to trading halts caused by extraordinary market volatility pursuant to the Exchange's “circuit breaker” rule 26 or by the halt or suspension of the trading of the Index components. 27 26 *See* NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.12. 27 *See* “UTP Trading Criteria” above for specific instances when the Exchange will cease trading the Securities. The Securities will be deemed “Eligible Listed Securities,” as defined in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.55, for purposes of the Intermarket Trading System (“ITS”) Plan and therefore will be subject to the trade through provisions of NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.56, which require that ETP Holders avoid initiating trade-throughs for ITS securities.

(e)Surveillance The Exchange will incorporate and rely upon existing surveillance procedures applicable to equities to monitor trading in the Securities. The Exchange believes that these procedures are adequate to monitor Exchange trading of the Securities in all trading sessions and detect violations of Exchange rules, thereby deterring manipulation. The Exchange's current trading surveillance focuses on detecting securities trading outside their normal patterns. When such situations are detected, surveillance analysis follows and investigations are opened, where appropriate, to review the behavior of all relevant parties for all relevant trading violations. The Exchange is able to obtain information regarding trading in the Securities and the Index components through ETP Holders in connection with such ETP Holders' proprietary or customer trades that they effect on any relevant market. In addition, the Exchange has access to transaction information, including customer identity information with respect to all contracts traded on NYMEX and the COMEX, a subsidiary of the NYMEX, pursuant to the Exchange's information sharing agreement with NYMEX.

(f)Information Bulletin Prior to the commencement of trading, the Exchange will inform its ETP Holders in an Information Bulletin of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Securities. Specifically, the Information Bulletin will discuss the following:

(1)The procedures for purchases and redemptions of Securities (and that Securities are not individually redeemable but are redeemable only in aggregations of at least 50,000 Securities);

(2)NYSE Arca Equities Rule 9.2(a), 28 which imposes a duty of due diligence on its ETP Holders to learn the essential facts relating to every customer prior to trading the Securities;

(3)how information regarding the IIV is disseminated;

(4)the requirement that ETP Holders deliver a prospectus to investors purchasing newly issued Securities prior to or concurrently with the confirmation of a transaction; and

(5)trading information. For example, the Information Bulletin will advise ETP Holders, prior to the commencement of trading, of the prospectus delivery requirements applicable to the Securities. The Exchange notes that investors purchasing Securities directly from Barclays will receive a prospectus. ETP Holders purchasing Securities from Barclays for resale to investors will deliver a prospectus to such investors. 28 The Exchange recently amended NYSE Arca Equities Rule 9.2(a) (“Diligence as to Accounts”) to provide that ETP Holders, before recommending a transaction, must have reasonable grounds to believe that the recommendation is suitable for the customer based on any facts disclosed by the customer as to his other security holdings and as to his financial situation and needs. Further, the Rule provides that prior to the execution of a transaction recommended to a non-institutional customer, the ETP Holders should make reasonable efforts to obtain information concerning the customer's financial status, tax status, investment objectives and any other information that they believe would be useful to make a recommendation. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54045 (June 26, 2006), 71 FR 37971 (July 3, 2006) (SR-PCX-2005-115). The Information Bulletin will also reference the fact that there is no regulated source of last sale information regarding physical commodities, and that the Commission has no jurisdiction over the trading of physical commodities such as crude oil, or the futures contracts on which the value of the Securities is based. The Information Bulletin will also discuss any exemptive or no-action relief, if granted, by the Commission staff from any rules under the Act. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the basis for this proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements under Section 6(b)(5) 29 of the Act that an exchange have rules that are 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 transaction in securities, to remove impediments and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 29 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(5). In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Rule 12f-5 under the Act 30 because it deems the Securities to be equity securities, thus rendering the Securities subject to the Exchange's rules governing the trading of equity securities. 31 30 17 CFR 240.12f-5. 31 Telephone conference between John Carey, Assistant General Counsel, NYSE Group, Inc., and Florence Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, Division, Commission, on July 12, 2006 (the Exchange requested that the Commission delete the word “existing” to clarify that the Securities will be subject to all applicable Exchange rules governing the trading of equity securities for the Securities). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited nor received. III. 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-NYSEArca-2006-18 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-2006-18. 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 offices 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-2006-18 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2006. IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change 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. 32 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 33 which requires that an exchange have rules designed, among other things, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, 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. 32 In approving this rule change, the Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 33 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). In addition, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with Section 12(f) of the Act, 34 which permits an exchange to trade, pursuant to UTP, a security that is listed and registered on another exchange. 35 The Commission notes that it previously approved the listing and trading of the Securities on the NYSE. 36 The Commission also finds that the proposal is consistent with Rule 12f-5 under the Act, 37 which provides that an exchange shall not extend UTP to a security unless the exchange has in effect a rule or rules providing for transactions in the class or type of security to which the exchange extends UTP. NYSE Arca Equities rules deem the Securities to be equity securities, thus trading in the Securities will be subject to the Exchange's rules governing the trading of equity securities and the specific rules set forth herein for this product class. 34 15 U.S.C. 78 *l* (f). 35 Section 12(a) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78l(a), generally prohibits a broker-dealer from trading a security on a national securities exchange unless the security is registered on that exchange pursuant to Section 12 of the Act. Section 12(f) of the Act excludes from this restriction trading in any security to which an exchange “extends UTP.” When an exchange extends UTP to a security, it allows its members to trade the security as if it were listed and registered on the exchange even though it is not so listed and registered. 36 *See* NYSE Order, *supra* note 5. 37 17 CFR 240.12f-5. The Commission further believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act, 38 which sets forth Congress's finding that it is in the public interest and appropriate for the protection of investors and the maintenance of fair and orderly markets to assure the availability to brokers, dealers, and investors of information with respect to quotations for and transactions in securities. 38 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1)(C)(iii). In support of the portion of the proposed rule change regarding UTP of the Securities, the Exchange has made the following representations: 1. NYSE Arca Equities has appropriate rules to facilitate transactions in this type of security in all trading sessions. 2. NYSE Arca Equities surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of the Securities on the Exchange. 3. NYSE Arca Equities will distribute an Information Bulletin to its members prior to the commencement of trading of the Securities on the Exchange that explains the terms, characteristics, and risks of trading such securities. 4. NYSE Arca Equities will require a member with a customer who purchases newly issued Securities on the Exchange to provide that customer with a product prospectus and will note this prospectus delivery requirement in the Information Bulletin. 5. The Exchange will cease trading in the Securities if:

(1)The primary market stops trading the securities because of a regulatory halt similar to a halt based on NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.12 and/or a halt because the IIV or Index value are not disseminated at least every 15 seconds; or

(2)if such other event occurs or condition exists which, in the opinion of the Exchange, makes further dealings on the Exchange inadvisable; or

(3)the primary market delists the Securities. This approval order is conditioned on NYSE Arca Equities' adherence to these representations. The Commission finds good cause for approving this proposed rule change, as amended, before the thirtieth day after the publication of notice thereof in the **Federal Register** . As noted previously, the Commission previously found that the listing and trading of these Securities on the NYSE is consistent with the Act. 39 The Commission presently is not aware of any issue that would cause it to revisit that earlier finding or preclude the trading of these funds on the Exchange pursuant to UTP. Therefore, accelerating approval of this proposed rule change should benefit investors by creating, without undue delay, additional competition in the market for these Securities. 39 *See* NYSE Order, *supra* note 5. V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the proposed rule change (NYSEArca-2006-18), is hereby approved , as amended, on an accelerated basis. 40 40 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 41 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 41 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12699 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54230; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2006-41] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Linkage Fee Pilot Program July 27, 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 July 7, 2006, the NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons and is approving the proposal on an accelerated basis for a pilot period through July 31, 2007. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The NYSE Arca is proposing to amend the NYSE Arca Options, Trade-Related Charges section of the Schedule of Fees and Charges (“Schedule”) in order to extend until July 31, 2007, the current pilot program regarding transaction fees charged for trades executed through the intermarket options linkage plan (“Linkage”). The text of the proposed rule change is available on the NYSE Arca's Web site at ( *http://www.archipelago.com* ), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item III below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of this proposed rule change is to extend for one year the pilot program establishing NYSE Arca fees for Principal (“P”) Orders and Principal Acting as Agent (“P/A”) Orders executed through Linkage. The fees currently are effective for a pilot program set to expire on July 31, 2006, and this filing would extend the fees through July 31, 2007. Executions on NYSE Arca resulting from Linkage orders are subject to the same billing treatment as other broker-dealer (“BD”) executions. The present execution fee is $0.26, which is comprised of a $0.21 transaction fee and a $0.05 per contract comparison fee. These are the same fees that all NYSE Arca Option Trading Permit Holders pay for non-customer transactions executed on the Exchange. The Exchange does not charge for the execution of Satisfaction Orders sent through Linkage and is not proposing to charge for such orders. BD orders that are entered and executed electronically on NYSE Arca are presently subject to a $0.25 BD surcharge. Linkage orders that are electronically executed on the Exchange are subject to the same billing treatment as other BD transactions. The Exchange recently filed NYSEArca-2006-20, 3 which proposes a change to the Schedule to reflect that the $0.25 BD surcharge will also be applied to Linkage orders submitted and executed electronically on the Exchange. The extension of the existing Linkage fee pilot program proposed with this filing does not reflect the changes proposed to the Schedule pursuant to NYSEArca-2006-20. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54130 (July 11, 2006) 71 FR 41305 (July 20, 2006). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 4 in general, and Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 5 in particular, in that the proposed rule change provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its members and other persons using its facilities. 4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 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 The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on 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-NYSEArca-2006-41 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-NYSEArca-2006-41. 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-NYSEArca-2006-41 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 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-NYSEArca-2006-41) is hereby approved on an accelerated basis for a pilot period to expire on July 31, 2007. 10 *Id.* 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12701 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54238; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2006-13] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change and Amendments No. 1 and 2 and Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Amendment No. 3 Thereto Relating to the Establishment of the OX Trading Platform July 28, 2006. I. Introduction On May 2, 2006, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 to establish the OX trading platform. The Exchange filed Amendments No. 1 and 2 to the proposed rule change on June 9, 2006 and June 15, 2006, respectively. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on June 23, 2006. 3 The Commission received one comment on the proposal. 4 On July 27, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 3 to the proposal. 5 This order approves the proposed rule change, as amended by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, grants accelerated approval to Amendment No. 3, and solicits comments from interested persons on Amendment No. 3. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53995 (June 15, 2006), 71 FR 36145 (“OX Notice”). 4 *See* letter dated July 20, 2006 from Bryan Rule (“Rule Letter”). 5 In Amendment No. 3, the Exchange:

(i)Made certain representations about entering into a agreement with the NASD pursuant to Rule 17d-2 under the Act following approval of this proposed rule change;

(ii)offered further analysis of why the proposal is not inconsistent with Section 11(a) of the Act;

(iii)clarified that Satisfaction Orders would be handled in the same manner as they are handled on PCX Plus;

(iv)submitted a rule that would require a three second exposure period before certain orders could be crossed;

(v)represented that NYSE Arca Rule 11.3 would require an OX Market Maker to maintain information barriers that are reasonably designed to prevent the misuse of material, non-public barriers between “side-by-side” market makers;

(vi)removed a reference to an “Opening Only” order type;

(vii)clarified the price at which certain orders would be executed in the Working Order Process and made other technical corrections to the proposal. The complete text of Amendment No. 3 is available on the Commission's Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ), at the Commission's Public Reference Room, and at the Exchange. II. Description of the Proposal NYSE Arca proposes to establish rules for OX, a fully automated trading system for standardized equity options intended to replace NYSE Arca's current options trading platform, PCX Plus. 6 OX would provide an electronic order delivery, execution and reporting system for designated options listed and traded on NYSE Arca through which orders and quotes of Users 7 are consolidated for execution and display. Market Makers would be able to stream quotes to OX either from on the trading floor or remotely. 6 See NYSE Arca Rule 6.90. 7 *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.1A(a)(19). OX would be available for the entry and execution of quotes and orders to OTP Holders, 8 OTP Firms 9 and, through Sponsoring OTP Firms, 10 certain non-OTP Firms and Holders, known as Sponsored Participants 11 (collectively, “Users”). In general, Users would be able to enter market orders, marketable limit orders and limit orders. Only Market Makers would be permitted to enter quotes on OX. As Users enter bids and offers ( *i.e.* , orders and quotes) into the system, any non-marketable limit orders and quotes would be ranked in an electronic limit order file (the “OX Book”) 12 according to price-time priority, such that within each price level, all bids and offers are organized by the time of entry. The OX Book (except for certain Working Orders 13 with conditional prices or sizes) would be displayed to all Users. For market orders or marketable limit orders, like-priced bids and offers would be matched by OX for execution at prices equal to or better than the NBBO pursuant to the following algorithm, which is based on price-time priority: 8 *See* NYSE Arca Rule 1.1(q). 9 *See* NYSE Arca Rule 1.1(r). 10 *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.1A(a)(17). 11 *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.1A(a)(16). 12 *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.1A(a)(14). 13 *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.62A(e). *Step 1:* All market orders and marketable limit orders would be matched against the displayed top of the OX Book. *Step 2:* If an order has not been executed in its entirety pursuant to Step 1, then OX would match the order against any Working Orders, which are orders with a conditional or undisplayed size. Examples of Working Orders include a reserve order, an order with a portion of the size displayed, and a reserve portion of the size that is not displayed. *Step 3:* If an order has not been executed in its entirety pursuant to Steps 1 and 2, the order would be routed to another Market Center 14 for execution (either through the intermarket options linkage (“Linkage”) or via a broker-dealer affiliated with NYSE Arca, Archipelago Securities) unless the User has designated that the order may not be routed to another Market Center. If an order that is routed to another Market Center is not executed in its entirety, the order would be ranked and displayed in the OX Book in accordance with the terms of such order and such order would be eligible for execution. 14 *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.1A(a)(6). The OX rules also would permit the crossing of orders on the trading floor via open outcry. Specifically, the Exchange would provide rules governing regular-way, facilitation, and solicitation crosses and introduce the ability for OTP Holders and OTP Firms to execute Mid-Point Crosses 15 in accordance with one of the three crossing rules. 15 *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.47(d). OTP Holders and OTP Firms meeting certain qualifications would be permitted to register as either Lead Market Makers (“LMMs”) or Market Makers in one or more option classes traded on OX. 16 In addition, LMMs would continue to be responsible for handling orders under the Plan for the Purpose of Creating and Operating an Intermarket Option Linkage (“Linkage Plan”). 17 16 Unless specified, or unless the context requires otherwise, the term “Market Maker” as used herein refers to both Market Makers and LMMs. 17 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43086 (July 28, 2000), 65 FR 48023 (August 4, 2000). Subsequently, upon separate requests by the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Phlx”), the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (“PCX”), and the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc., the Commission issued orders to permit these exchanges to participate in the Linkage Plan. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 43573 (November 16, 2000), 65 FR 70850 (November 28, 2000), 43574 (November 16, 2000), 65 FR 70851 (November 28, 2000) and 49198 (February 5, 2004), 69 FR 7029 (February 12, 2004). III. Discussion After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange 18 and, in particular, with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. 19 Specifically, the Commission finds that approval of the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 20 in that it is designed to facilitate transactions in securities; to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices; to promote just and equitable principles of trade; to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities; to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system; and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 18 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). 19 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 20 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). A. Access to OX As noted briefly above, the Exchange proposes to expand the types of market participants eligible to trade on its options trading facility. OTP Holders and OTP Firms with access to PCX Plus at the time of this proposal would continue to have access to the Exchange through the OX platform. In addition, the Exchange proposes to permit entities that are neither OTP Holders nor OTP Firms to access the OX platform as “Sponsored Participants.” The Exchange proposes to define a Sponsored Participant as a person, such as an institutional investor, who has entered into a sponsorship agreement with a Sponsoring OTP Firm, that has been designated to execute, clear, and settle transactions on the Exchange for the Sponsored Participant. The Sponsored Participant and its Sponsoring OTP Firm would be required to enter into a written agreement incorporating the provisions required by proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.2(c). Specifically, the Sponsoring OTP Firm would acknowledge, among other things, that all orders entered by the Sponsored Participant and any executions occurring as a result of such orders are binding in all respects on the Sponsoring OTP Firm and that it is responsible for any and all actions taken by its Sponsored Participant. The Sponsoring OTP Firm also would be required to provide the Exchange notice that it is responsible for the actions of its Sponsored Participant(s). The Sponsored Participant, in turn, would agree, among other things, to comply with applicable NYSE Arca rules and procedures as if it were an OTP Firm and agree to take precautions to prevent unauthorized access to the Exchange. The Sponsored Participants would be required to establish and maintain an up-to-date list of persons permitted to obtain access to OX on behalf of the Sponsored Participant ( *i.e.,* “Authorized Traders”) 21 and to provide that list to the Sponsoring OTP Firm. 21 *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.1A(a)(1). The Commission approved a substantially similar arrangement for trading on NYSE Arca's predecessor entity, the Pacific Exchange, when the Commission approved the establishment of the Archipelago Exchange (“ArcaEx”) 22 as the equities trading facility of PCX Equities, Inc. 23 The Commission believes that, like the arrangement that the Commission previously approved for ArcaEx, the proposed sponsorship arrangement is consistent with the Act. 22 NYSE Arca LLC is the successor entity to ArcaEx. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53382 (February 27, 2006), 71 FR 11251 (March 6, 2006). 23 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44983 (October 25, 2001), 66 FR 55225 (November 1, 2001) (SR-PCX-00-25). B. Display Order and Working Order Processes Users of OX would be able to submit orders to an electronic file of orders in the OX Book. The OX Book would feature two trading processes—the “Display Order Process” and the—Working Order Process.” Bids and offers would be ranked, maintained, and executed generally according to price-time priority. 24 24 Under certain circumstances, an LMM would be guaranteed participation, after all customer orders ranked ahead of the LMM have been executed, in an order when the LMM is quoting the NBBO, but lacks time priority among Users bidding or offering the same price. *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.76B. 1. Display and Rank of Orders in the Displayed and Working Order Processes The Exchange would display all non-marketable Limit Orders in the Display Order Process of the OX Book. Limit Orders, with no other conditions, and quotes would be ranked based on the specified price and the time of original order or quote entry. The displayed portion of Reserve Orders 25 would be ranked in the Display Order Process at the specified limit price and the time of order entry. When the displayed portion of the Reserve Order is decremented completely, the displayed portion of the Reserve Order would be refreshed from the reserve amount for

(1)The displayed amount or

(2)the entire reserve amount, if the remaining reserve amount is smaller than the displayed amount. The refreshed quote would be submitted and ranked at the specified limit price and the new time that the displayed portion of the order was refreshed. 25 *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.62A(e)(1). The reserve portion of Reserve Orders would be ranked in the Working Order Process based on the specified limit price and the time of original order entry. After the displayed portion of a Reserve Order is refreshed from the reserve portion, the reserve portion would remain ranked based on the original time of order entry while the displayed portion would be sent to the Directed Order Process with a new time stamp. 2. Execution of Orders in the Display and Working Order Processes Once a booked order becomes marketable or upon a User's entry of a marketable order, all orders in OX would be matched generally based upon price-time priority, as described more fully below. OX first would attempt to match incoming marketable bids and offers against bids or offers in the Display Order Process at the display price of the resident bids or offers for the total amount of option contracts available at that price or for the size of the incoming order, whichever is smaller. NYSE Arca proposes to allocate incoming marketable bids and offers as follows: If an LMM is quoting in the option series at the NBBO, an incoming marketable bid or offer would be matched against all Customer 26 orders at the NBBO ranked ahead of the LMM. The remaining balance of the incoming marketable bid or offer would be matched against the quote of the LMM for either:

(1)An amount equal to 40% of the remaining balance of the incoming bid or offer up to the LMM's disseminated quote size or

(2)the LMM's share in the order of ranking in the OX Book, whichever is greater. Any remaining balance of the incoming marketable bid or offer would be matched against remaining marketable orders and quotes in the Display Order Process in the order of their ranking. If the incoming marketable bid or offer has not been executed in its entirety, the remaining part of the order would be directed to the Working Order Process. 26 *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.1A(a)(4). An incoming marketable bid or offer or portion thereof that fails to be executed in the Display Order Process, would be matched against orders within the Working Order Process in the order of their ranking. 3. Routing Away If an incoming marketable order has not been executed in its entirety on OX and has been designated as an order type that is eligible to be routed away, the order would be routed either in its entirety or as component orders for execution to other Market Center(s) disseminating the NBBO, either through the Linkage or through the use of the OX Routing Broker, as described below. Where an order or portion of an order is routed away and is not executed either in whole or in part at the other Market Center, the order would be ranked and displayed in the OX Book in accordance with the terms of the order, and the order would be eligible for execution. If an order has been designated as an order type that is not eligible to be routed away, the order either would be placed in the OX Book or cancelled if the order would lock or cross the NBBO. Further, the Working Order Process would provide a method for handling contingency orders as well as other order types, such as Reserve Orders. The Commission believes that the proposal is designed to avoid executions at prices inferior to the NBBO and is consistent with the Linkage Plan, NYSE Arca Rule 6.94 (Order Protection), and the Act. C. New Order Types The proposal would introduce several order types to NYSE Arca. In addition to the Reserve Order, described above, among the most significant order types that NYSE Arca is proposing to introduce are order types related to the routing away function. These new order types are designed to provide greater flexibility to Users to better control the execution of their orders. 1. Inside Limit Order An “Inside Limit Order” is defined as a limit order, which, if routed away, would be routed to the market participant or participants with the best displayed price. Any unfilled portion of the order would not be routed to the next best price level until all quotes at the current best bid or offer are exhausted. If the order is no longer marketable, the order would be ranked in the OX Book pursuant to the ranking and display provisions described above. 2. NOW Order A “NOW Order” is defined as a limit order that is to be executed in whole or in part on OX, with any remainder routed away only to one or more “NOW Recipients” for immediate execution. “NOW Recipients” would include any Market Center with which the Exchange maintains an electronic linkage and that provides instantaneous responses to NOW Orders routed from OX. Any portion of a NOW Order that is not immediately executed by the NOW Recipient would be cancelled. If a NOW Order is not marketable when it is submitted to OX, it would be cancelled. 3. PNP Order A “PNP (Post No Preference) Order” is defined as a limit order to buy or sell that is to be executed in whole or in part on the Exchange, and the portion not so executed would be ranked in the OX Book, without routing any portion of the order to another Market Center. The Exchange would cancel any PNP Order that would lock or cross the NBBO. D. Routing Broker and Linkage 1. Routing Broker As described above, in the event that an order is not marketable on OX, but is marketable on another exchange, the Exchange would route the order to another Market Center for execution. Orders could be routed either through Linkage or through a broker-dealer affiliate of NYSE Arca that acts as an agent for routing orders entered into OX by Users (“Routing Broker”), 27 based on preset parameters in its automated routing algorithm, subject to NYSE Arca rules. Accordingly, orders that would be eligible for routing over Linkage ( *e.g.* , public customer orders) could be routed to other Market Centers either as Principal Acting as Agent Orders (“P/A Orders”) 28 via Linkage or as customer orders via Archipelago Securities, based on the automated routing algorithm parameters. Generally, non-customer orders and NOW Orders 29 would be routed to other Market Centers via Archipelago Securities. As described above, certain order types, including Immediate or Cancel and PNP Orders, would not be eligible for routing away to other exchanges. 27 NYSE Arca proposes to use Archipelago Securities LLC (“Archipelago Securities”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Archipelago Holdings Inc. and a registered broker-dealer, as the Routing Broker. 28 *See* NYSE Arca Rule 6.92(a)(12)(i). 29 *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.62A(i). The OX order routing function of Archipelago Securities is an exchange “facility.” 30 As such, any proposed rule change relating to Archipelago Securities' order-routing function must be filed with the Commission, and must operate in a manner that is consistent with the provisions of the Act applicable to exchanges with NYSE Arca rules. In Amendment No. 3, the Exchange proposes to clarify that the NASD, a self-regulatory organization (“SRO”) unaffiliated with NYSE Arca or any of its affiliates, would continue to carry out oversight and enforcement responsibilities as the Designated Examining Authority designated by the Commission pursuant to Rule 17d-1 under the Act 31 with the responsibility for examining Archipelago Securities for compliance with the applicable financial responsibility rules. 30 See 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(2). 31 17 CFR 240.17d-1. Furthermore, in Amendment No. 3, the Exchange represents that it will enter into a new agreement with the NASD pursuant to Rule 17d-2 under the Act 32 (the “NYSE Arca Agreement”) to expand the allocation to the NASD of regulatory responsibility to encompass all of the regulatory oversight and enforcement responsibilities with respect to Archipelago Securities, except for “real-time market surveillance.” NYSE Arca will submit the NYSE Arca Agreement to the Commission under Rule 17d-2 within 90 days of the Commission's approval of this proposed rule change. 32 17 CFR 240.17d-2. The Commission notes that this representation is substantially similar to a representation the Exchange made when it amended the certificate of incorporation of PCX Holdings, Inc., certain rules of the Pacific Exchange, and the bylaws of Archipelago Holdings, Inc. (“Archipelago”) to facilitate the consummation of the merger between PCX Holdings, Inc. and its subsidiaries, and Archipelago (the “Merger”). 33 The Commission believes that delegating the regulatory function for the oversight of its wholly-owned subsidiary should help to ensure independence in the regulatory oversight of Archipelago Securities. 33 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52497 (September 22, 2005), 70 FR 56949 (September 29, 2005) (SR-PCX-2005-90). 2. Linkage Routing and Obligations The OX system would facilitate the routing of P/A Orders to other Market Centers via Linkage using the account of the LMM assigned to the option class being routed. The OX system, however, would not automatically generate Principal Orders 34 on behalf of Market Makers; rather, Eligible Market Makers 35 would be required to route their own Principal Orders if they want their proprietary orders sent to other Market Centers via Linkage. Satisfaction Orders 36 would be handled in the same manner on OX as they are handled on PCX Plus. 37 34 *See* NYSE Arca Rule 6.92(a)(12)(ii). 35 In Amendment No. 3, NYSE Arca proposed a technical change to its Rule 6.92(a)(7)(ii) to include certain OX Market Makers within the definition of “Eligible Market Maker.” 36 *See* NYSE Arca Rule 6.92(a)(12)(iii). 37 *See* Amendment No. 3, *supra* note 5. The existing NYSE Arca rules that apply to Linkage obligations, NYSE Arca Rules 6.92 through 6.96, would apply to OTP Holders and OTP Firms accessing the OX system. For example, those rules, in conjunction with the Linkage Plan, would continue to require:

(1)OTP Holders and OTP Firms to avoid Trade-throughs and to adjust their quotes in the event of a locked or crossed market; and

(2)for LMMs to handle inbound Linkage Orders. The Commission believes that the Exchange's proposed automated routing of certain Linkage Orders is consistent with the Linkage Plan. E. Market Makers 1. Market Maker Obligations The OX proposal provides for two types of market makers: LMMs and Market Makers. A Market Maker on OX would be an OTP Holder or OTP Firm registered with NYSE Arca for the purpose of submitting quotes electronically and effecting transactions as a dealer-specialist through the OX trading platform either from the trading floor or from off the trading floor. Market Makers would be designated as specialists on NYSE Arca for all purposes under the Act and rules and regulations thereunder. No more than one LMM would be appointed in each option class, and the Exchange would be required to appoint at least one LMM in each option class. The Exchange may appoint any number of Market Makers in each class, unless limited by quotation system capacity. However, the Exchange will not restrict access to any particular option class until the Commission approves objective standards for restricting such access. A Market Maker would be required to, among other things, compete with other Market Makers to improve the market in all series of options classes to which the Market Maker is appointed, update market quotations in response to changed market conditions in all series of options classes within its appointed classes, honor its quotations, and submit quotations in accordance with maximum Exchange prescribed width requirements. In addition, LMMs and Market Makers would be required to provide continuous, two-sided quotes in their appointed issues for 99% and 60%, respectively, of the time the Exchange is open for trading in each issue. LMMs and Market Makers also would be required to trade at least 75% of their contract volume per quarter in classes within their appointment. Market Maker quotes would be “firm” for all orders that are routed to OX. The Exchange would evaluate Market Makers periodically to determine whether they have fulfilled performance standards relating to, among other things, quality of markets, competition among Market Makers, and ethical standards. In transitioning to the OX platform from PCX Plus, the Exchange proposes to eliminate provisions for the appointment of “Remote Market Makers” and “Supplemental Market Makers.” Accordingly, the proposed rules for the OX platform do not direct where Market Makers must be physically located when effecting transactions on NYSE Arca and would eliminate “in-person” trading requirements applicable to Market Makers that trade on the floor. Market Makers receive certain benefits for carrying out their duties. For example, a lender may extend credit to a broker-dealer without regard to the restrictions in Regulation T of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve system if the credit is to be used to finance the broker-dealer's activities as a specialist or market maker on a national securities exchange. 38 The Commission believes that a Market Maker must have an affirmative obligation to hold itself out as willing to buy and sell options for its own account on a regular or continuous basis to justify this favorable treatment. In this regard, the Commission believes that OX rules are reasonably designed to impose such affirmative obligations on OX Market Makers. 38 *See* 12 CFR 221.5(c)(6). 2. Market Maker Authorized Traders The Exchange is proposing to limit Market Maker access to OX to those OTP Holders or officers, partners, employees or associated persons of OTP Firms that are registered with the Exchange as Market Makers (“Market Maker Authorized Traders” or “MMATs”). MMAT candidates will be required to pass an examination to demonstrate knowledge of NYSE Arca rules prior to being approved by the Exchange as a Market Maker Authorized Trader. The proposal would also establish standards and procedures governing the suspension of registration of an MMAT. The Commission believes these requirements are reasonably designed to ensure that the Exchange is informed of the identities and qualifications of individuals accessing OX on behalf of Market Makers and are consistent with the Act. 3. Market Maker Risk Limitation NYSE Arca is proposing to provide a mechanism for limiting Market Maker risk during periods of increased and significant trading activity. OX would activate the Market Maker Risk Limitation Mechanism in a Market Maker's appointed class whenever a designated number of executions (ranging between 5 and 100 executions) occurs within one second. Orders and quotes received by OX after the Mechanism is activated would not be executed against the Market Maker. The Commission believes that establishing a uniform one second standard in place of the existing variable “n” seconds standard on PCX Plus is consistent with the Act. On the PCX Plus system, the Exchange disseminates a market on behalf of an LMM when there are no Market Makers quoting in a series and volume parameters are exceeded. The Exchange proposes that if the mechanism were activated under the OX system and there were no Market Makers quoting in a series, the Exchange would no longer generate two-sided quotes on behalf of the LMM. Instead, on OX, the best bids and offers residing in the OX Book would be disseminated as the BBO. If there were no orders in the OX Book in the issue at that time, OX would disseminate a bid of zero and an offer of zero. The Commission believes that the proposed approach is consistent with the Act. 4. Integrated Market Making In Amendment No. 3, the Exchange represents that NYSE Arca Rule 11.3, which governs the use of material, non-public information, would apply to OTP Holders and OTP Firms trading on OX. The Exchange represents that this rule would require an OX Market Maker to maintain information barriers—reasonably designed to prevent the misuse of material, non-public information by such member—between the OX Market Maker and any of its affiliates that may act as specialist or market maker in any security underlying the options in which the Market Maker makes a market on OX. The Commission believes that requiring information barriers between the OX Market Maker and its affiliates with respect to transactions in the option and the underlying security are important to reduce the opportunity for unfair trading advantages or misuse of material, non-public information. 39 39 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47838 (May 13, 2003), 68 FR 27129, 27137 (May 19, 2003) (SR-PCX-2002-36). F. Trading Auctions (Opening and Trading Halt) The Exchange is proposing new procedures for initiating trading in a given options class (“Trading Auction”). The new procedures will apply to orders designated for inclusion in the opening auction process (“Auction Process”) and upon re-opening of trading after a trading halt. In particular, the OX system will accept Market Orders and Limit Orders and quotes for inclusion in the Trading Auction, up until the time the Trading Auction is initiated in that options series. Non-Market Makers would be able to submit orders for inclusion in the Trading Auction, and Market Makers would be able to submit two-sided quotes and orders. Contingency orders would not participate in the Auction Process. Any eligible open orders residing in the OX Book from the previous trading session would be included in the Auction Process. After the primary market for the underlying security disseminates the opening trade or the opening quote, the related option series would be opened automatically at a single price. Among the most significant principles in the Trading Auction is that orders will have priority over Market Maker quotes. In addition, orders in the OX Book that are not executed during the Auction Process will be eligible for execution during the Core Trading Hours 40 immediately after the conclusion of the Opening Auction. 40 *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.1A(a)(3). The opening price of a series would be the price, as determined by the OX system, at which the greatest number of contracts would trade at or nearest to the mid-point of the initial NBBO calculated by the Exchange from the quotes disseminated by Options Price Reporting Authority, if any, or the mid-point of the best quote bids and quote offers in the OX Book. Mid-point pricing would not occur if that price would result in an order or part of an order being traded through. Instead, the opening would occur at that limit price, or, if the limit price is superior to the quoted market, within the range of 75% of the best quote bid and 125% of the best quote offer. Orders and Marker Maker quotes that do not trade during the Trading Auction, but are marketable against the initial NBBO following the Trading Auction, would “sweep” through the OX Book and be executed in price/time priority. If the best price is at an away Market Center, orders would be routed away to the appropriate Market Center, pursuant to NYSE Arca rules. The Commission believes that the proposed Trading Auction is reasonably designed to facilitate executions at the opening and following trading halts. The Commission further believes that the proposal is designed to avoid executions at prices inferior to the NBBO. G. Crossing Rules Under the proposal, OTP Holders and OTP Firms would be permitted to conduct crossing transactions on the floor of the Exchange. The Exchange is proposing to replace its existing crossing rule with a new NYSE Arca Rule 6.47, which would govern crosses effected on the trading floor. Consistent with the existing version of NYSE Arca Rule 6.47, the proposed amendment provides for non-facilitation (or “regular way”) crosses, facilitation crosses, and solicitation crosses. In all cases, orders must be announced to the trading crowd in open outcry, and trading crowd participants would be given a reasonable time to respond with the prices and sizes at which they would be willing to participate in the cross. With respect to all crosses, a Trading Official would be available at each post on the trading floor to assist in the determination of what is a “reasonable time,” when necessary. Trading crowd participants who make bids or offers equal to or better than the proposed cross price would be permitted to participate in a cross. In addition, in no event would a cross occur that would trade through the NBBO or any bids or offers on the Book priced equal to or better than the proposed execution price. Floor Brokers holding orders to buy and sell the same option contract may cross such orders after following the non-facilitation (regular way) cross procedures. After requesting bids and offers in the option series from the trading crowd, the Floor Broker must bid above the highest bid in the crowd, or offer below the lowest offer in the crowd, by at least the MPV. The Floor Broker may then cross the orders at that price provided that the execution price is equal to or better than the NBBO and that the Floor Broker satisfies any bids or offers on the Book that are priced equal to or better than the proposed execution price. With respect to facilitation crosses, which involve a Floor Broker holding a customer order and an order for the account of an OTP Holder, OTP Firm, or entity under the common control of a Market Maker representing the customer (“Facilitation Order”), the Floor Broker must be willing to facilitate the entire size of the customer order in order to utilize the mechanism, and the size of the customer order must be at least 50 contracts. After the Floor Broker exposes the customer order to the trading crowd for a reasonable period of time, if at the time of execution there is sufficient size to execute the entire customer order at an improved price (or prices), the customer order would be executed at the improved price, so long as such execution price is equal to or better than the NBBO. If at the time of execution there is insufficient size to execute the entire customer order at an improved price (or prices), a Floor Broker would be permitted to participate in up to 40% of the balance of the order to be facilitated once bids or offers in the Book equal to or better than the proposed execution price, non-member bids and offers in the trading crowd at or better than the proposed execution price, and member bids and offers in the trading crowd priced better than the proposed execution price, have been satisfied. 41 Thereafter, Market Makers in the trading crowd who are bidding or offering the proposed execution price may participate in the balance of the customer order based upon price-time priority. 42 The balance of the unexecuted agency order, if any, would be executed against the remaining Floor Broker proprietary interest. 41 When executing the customer order to be facilitated against such bids and offers, bids and offers representing customer orders would be required to be executed first. *See* proposed NYSE Arca Rule 6.47(b)(7). The Commission notes that NYSE Arca's facilitation cross procedures would allow all NYSE Arca members to avail themselves of the exception to Section 11(a) of the Act set forth in Section 11(a)(1)(G) of the Act and Rule 11a-1(T). 42 The Floor Broker is responsible for determining the sequence in which Market Makers' bids or offers are vocalized. *See* NYSE Arca Rule 6.75(f)(1). In the event that the bids or offers of two or more Market Makers are made simultaneously, such bids or offers will be deemed to be on parity and priority will be afforded to them, insofar as practicable, on an equal basis. *See* NYSE Arca Rule 6.75(c). The proposal would also permit the crossing of solicited orders, which involve a Floor Broker holding an order for a customer of an OTP Holder or OTP Firm for which the Floor Broker solicits contra side interest in the trading crowd. Crosses involving Solicited Orders would be handled in a manner whereby superior priced and equal priced orders in the book and interest in the crowd which collectively is of sufficient size to execute against the original customer order would be executed before the Solicited Order. Customer orders, at a given price, would be executed before non-Customer orders at the same price. 43 43 In Amendment No. 3, the Exchange clarified the Solicited Cross rule. Specifically, the Exchange represented that only orders that are represented by a Floor Broker as agent are eligible for crossing via the Solicited Order procedures. If the Floor Broker represents an order for a covered account, the member order must satisfy the requirements of Section 11(a) of the Act and the rules thereunder. The Commission further notes that the Exchange has represented that a member may not rely on the exception found in Section 11(a)(1)(G) of the Act when utilizing the solicited order procedures. The Exchange also proposes to add a new category of cross order, the Mid-Point Crossing Order. A Floor Broker who holds a Mid-Point Crossing Order to buy and sell an option contract at the mid-point between the electronically disseminated BBO or better in the subject option series would be permitted to cross such an order in accordance with the procedures for regular way, facilitation or solicitation crosses, as applicable. The Mid-Point Cross will not occur if the price of the midpoint of the NYSE Arca BBO is inferior to the NBBO or if the mid-point does not fall on a standard increment. In reviewing proposed crossing mechanisms, the Commission considers the potential that crosses will lock up large portions of order flow from intramarket price competition by granting certain market participants extensive participation guarantees, such as the guarantee granted to Floor Brokers in the proposed OX Facilitation cross. To that end, the Commission notes that the 40% participation guarantee that Floor Brokers would receive pursuant to the proposed Facilitation Procedure, as described above, is consistent with similar guarantees accorded to members effecting facilitation crosses on other exchanges. 44 The Commission believes that the proposed crossing procedures are reasonably designed to ensure that interest in the crowd and on the book is protected, in that all Customer interest at the same price (whether residing in the trading crowd or on the book) must be satisfied before other interest may be executed. The Commission also believes that these procedures should promote intramarket price competition by providing market makers and other market participants with a reasonable opportunity to compete for the proposed cross. 44 *See, e.g* , International Securities Exchange (“ISE”) Rule 716(d). The Commission further notes that the proposed OX rules would not permit electronic crosses. In Amendment No. 3, the Exchanges proposes to clarify that Users seeking to effect certain orders as agent against their own principal account must ensure that either the agency order or the User's quote must be displayed on OX for three second seconds prior to execution. Specifically the proposed rule would provide, among other things, that Users may not execute as principal orders they represent as agent unless agency orders are first exposed on the Exchange for at least three seconds or the User has been bidding or offering on the Exchange for at least three seconds prior to receiving an agency order that is executable against such bid or offer. The Commission believes this proposed order exposure provision is substantially similar to the rules of other SRO rules that require members to wait three seconds before executing principal orders against an order they represent as agent. 45 In addition, the Commission expects that the Exchange will closely surveil to ensure that all crossing transactions are not effected without first being exposed to intramarket competition. 45 *See, e.g.,* ISE Rule 717. H. Section 11(a) of the Act Section 11(a)(1) of the Act 46 prohibits a member of a national securities exchange from effecting transactions on that exchange for its own account, the account of an associated person, or an account over which it or its associated person exercises investment discretion (collectively, “covered accounts”) unless an exception applies. 46 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1). Among the transactions excepted under Section 11(a)(1) are those by a dealer acting in the capacity of a market maker, bona fide arbitrage or hedge transactions, and transactions made to offset errors. In the proposed rule change, the Exchange has set forth its analysis of how the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 11(a) of the Act and the rules thereunder. Rule 11a2-2(T) Interpretive Request Rule 11a2-2(T) under the Act, 47 known as the “effect versus execute” rule, provides exchange members with another exception from the general Section 11(a)(1) prohibition. Rule 11a2-2(T) permits an exchange member, subject to certain conditions, to effect transactions for covered accounts by arranging for an unaffiliated member to execute the transactions on the exchange. To comply with Rule 11a2-2(T)'s conditions, a member

(i)Must transmit the order from off the exchange floor;

(ii)must not participate in the execution of the transaction once it has been transmitted to the member performing the execution; 48

(iii)must not be affiliated with the executing member; and

(iv)with respect to an account over which the member has investment discretion, neither the member nor its associated person may retain any compensation in the connection with effecting the transaction except as provided in the rule. As described by the Commission, these four requirements—off-floor transmission, non-participation in order execution, execution through an unaffiliated member and non-retention of compensation for discretionary accounts—were “designed to put members and non-members on the same footing, to the extent practicable, in light of the purposes of Section 11(a).” 49 If a transaction meets the requirements of the “effect versus execute” rule, it will be deemed to be “consistent with the purpose of Section 11(a)(1) of the Act, the protection of investors, and the maintenance of fair and orderly markets.” 50 The Exchange stated that given OX's automated matching and execution services, no Exchange member will enjoy any special control over the timing of execution or special order handling advantages for orders executed via OX, as all orders will be centrally processed for execution by computer, rather than being handled by a member through bids or offers made on the trading floor. The Exchange further stated that it believes that due to OX's open, electronic structure that is designed to prevent any Exchange members from gaining any time and place advantages, the Exchange believes that OX satisfies the four requirements of the “effect versus execute” rule as well as the general policy objectives of Section 11(a) of the Act. 47 17 CFR 240.11a2-2(T). 48 The member may, however, participate in clearing and settling the transaction. The commenter raises concerns about whether the proposed OX system satisfies this prong of the “effect versus execute” rule. According to the commenter, the notice of the proposal states that “NYSE Arca ‘may not participate in the execution of the transaction once the order has been transmitted’ ” and that “[t]he NYSE Arca plan does interfere with the transmission and execution of options orders.” To support this assertion, the commenter states that orders may be routed away to different exchanges for execution in certain circumstances. *See* Rule Letter, *supra* note 4. The Commission believes that the commenter mischaracterizes the discussion of this prong of the “effect versus execute” rule set forth in the notice of the proposal. The OX Notice states that the exchange member and its associated person (not NYSE Arca, as stated by the commenter) may not participate in the execution of the transaction once the order has been transmitted. The Commission believes that OX satisfies this prong, as discussed above. 49 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 14713 (April 27, 1978), 43 FR 18557, 18560 (May 1, 1978) (“1978 Release”). 50 *See* Rule 11a2-2(T)(e) under the Act. 1. Off-Floor Transmission Rule 11a2-2(T) requires an order for a covered account to be transmitted from off the exchange floor. In considering the application of this requirement to a number of automated trading and electronic order-handling facilities operated by national securities exchanges, the Commission has deemed the off-floor requirement to be met if the order is transmitted from off the floor directly to the electronic order handling facility that compromises the exchange floor by electronic means. 51 Like these other automated systems, the Exchange has represented that orders sent to OX will be transmitted from remote terminals directly to the system by electronic means and that most member orders, except as described below, will be submitted to OX from off of the floor. Therefore, those members' orders sent to the OX system electronically from off the Exchange floor satisfy the off-floor transmission requirement for the purposes of the “effect versus execute” rule. 51 *See* letter from Larry E. Bergmann, Senior Associate Director, Division of Market Regulation (“Division”), Commission, to Edith Hallahan, Associate General Counsel, Phlx (March 24, 1999) (“VWAP Letter”); letter from Catherine McGuire, Chief Counsel, Division, Commission, to David E. Rosedahl, PCX (November 30, 1998) (“OptiMark Letter”); and letter from Brandon Becker, Director, Division, Commission, to George T. Simon, Partner, Foley & Lardner (November 30, 1994) (“Chicago Match Letter”). 2. Non-Participation in Order Execution The “effect versus execute” rule further provides that the exchange member and its associated person may not participate in the execution of the transaction once the order has been transmitted. The Exchange has represented that upon submission to OX, an order will enter the queue and be executed against another order in the OX Book based on an established matching algorithm. The execution depends not on whether an order is for the account of an Exchange member, but rather, upon what other orders are entered into OX at or around the same time as the subject order, what orders are resident in the OX Book and where the order is ranked based on the price-time priority ranking algorithm. Therefore, the Exchange stated that at no time following the submission of an order is an Exchange member able to acquire control or influence over the result or timing of its order's execution. As a result, the Commission believes that the non-participation requirement is met because OTP Holder or OTP Firm orders are matched and executed automatically in OX. 3. Execution Through Unaffiliated Member The third requirement of Rule 11a2-2(T) is that the exchange member who executes the order be unaffiliated with the member initiating the order. The Commission has recognized, however, that this requirement may be met where automated exchange facilities are used. For example, in considering the operation of COMEX and PACE, among other systems, the Commission noted that while there is no independent executing exchange member, the execution of an order is automatic once it has been transmitted into the systems. 52 Because the design of these systems ensures that members do not possess any special or unique trading advantages in handling their orders after transmitting them to the exchange floors, the Commission has stated or not objected to the Exchange's conclusion that executions obtained through these systems satisfy the independent execution requirement of Rule 11a2-2(T) that the member not be affiliated with the executing broker. 53 The Exchange stated that this requirement is satisfied by the OX system because the design of OX ensures that members do not have any special or unique trading advantages in handling their orders after transmission. Accordingly, a transaction for a covered account that submitted directly by a member into OX, from off of the Exchange floor, for execution satisfies the unaffiliated member requirement. 52 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 15533 (January 29, 1979), 44 FR 6084 (January 31, 1979) (“1979 Release”). *See also* VWAP Letter, OptiMark Letter and Chicago Match Letter. 53 *Id.* 4. Non-Retention of Compensation Finally, Rule 11a2-2(T) requires that, in the case of a transaction effected for an account with respect to which an exchange member or associated person thereof exercises investment discretion, neither the member or its associated persons may retain compensation in connection with effecting the transaction without the express written consent of the person authorized to transact business for the account, given in accordance with the rule. Exchange members relying on Rule 11a2-2(T) for transactions effected through OX must comply with this condition of the rule. The Commission notes that NYSE Arca would enforce this requirement pursuant to its obligation under Section 6(b)(1) of the Act 54 to enforce compliance with the federal securities laws. 54 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1). In Amendment No. 3, the Exchange clarified its discussion regarding the application of Rule 11a2-2(T) found in Amendment No. 1. Specifically, the discussion in Amendment 1 was limited to the application of Rule 11a2-2(T) to orders for covered accounts sent electronically to the OX system directly by the member from off of the exchange for execution. The Commission notes that the Exchange's discussion in Amendment No. 1 did not address instances where a member on the physical floor of the Exchange submits an order for a covered account into the OX system from the physical floor by electronic means. Accordingly, to rely on the exception set forth in Rule 11a2-2(T), the Exchange clarified that members must ensure that they send their orders from off the floor to an unaffiliated member for execution, in addition to meeting the rules' other requirements. If a member sends its order from off of the floor to an affiliated member that is on the floor who then directs the order into the OX system for execution, the member may not rely on Rule 11a2-2(T) for an exception from Section 11(a) of the Act. If a member wishes to rely on the exception found in paragraph

(G)of Section 11(a)(1) of the Act, its order may only be executed on the physical floor of the Exchange. Member proprietary orders that rely on the exception found in Section 11(a)(1)(G) of the Act may not be entered into the OX system for execution. 55 55 The Exchange represented to the Commission's staff that it will submit to the Commission promptly a proposed rule change pursuant to Rule 19b-4 under the Act to prohibit the entry of member orders that must rely on the exception found in Section 11(a)(1)(G) of the Act into the OX system. Telephone conversation among Janet Angstedt, Acting General Counsel, NYSE Arca, Kelly Riley, Assistant Director, Commission, Hong-Anh Tran, Special Counsel, Commission, Raymond Lombardo, Special Counsel, Commission, and Tim Fox, Special Counsel, Commission on July 25, 2006. I. Accelerated Approval of Amendment No. 3 The Commission finds good cause for approving Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after publishing notice of Amendment No. 3 in the **Federal Register** pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act. 56 56 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). In Amendment No. 3, the Exchange represents that the NASD would continue to carry out oversight and enforcement responsibilities as the Designated Examining Authority designated by the Commission pursuant to Rule 17d-1 under the Act 57 with the responsibility for examining Archipelago Securities for compliance with the applicable financial responsibility rules. The Exchange also represented that it will enter into an agreement with the NASD pursuant to Rule 17d-2 under the Act 58 to provide that NYSE Arca will delegate to the NASD all regulatory oversight and enforcement responsibilities with respect to Archipelago Securities pursuant to applicable laws, except for real-time market surveillance, within 90 days of the Commission's approval of this proposed rule change. As discussed above, the Commission believes that these representations raise no new issues of regulatory concern. 57 17 CFR 240.17d-1. 58 17 CFR 240.17d-2. As described in greater detail above, the Exchange also clarifies in Amendment No. 3 how the proposed OX trading platform and crossing procedures will comply with Section 11(a) of the Act and with the Linkage Plan. In the amendment, the Exchange also proposes to clarify its rules to incorporate an order exposure requirement comparable to similar rules adopted by the other options exchanges. The Exchange represents in Amendment No. 3 that NYSE Arca Rule 11.3 would require an OX Market Maker to maintain information barriers, that are reasonably designed to prevent the misuse of material, non-public information, with any affiliates that may act as specialist or market maker in any security underlying the options for which the OTP Holder/Firm acts as an OX Market Maker. In addition, the Exchange proposes to remove a reference to an “opening only” order type that the Exchange did not specifically propose. In Amendment No. 3, NYSE Arca also proposed to clarify that incoming marketable orders would be matched against all Working Orders in the Working Order Process at the price of the displayed portion (for Reserve Orders) or at the limit price (for all other Working Order types). The Commission notes that Amendment No. 3 is intended to reconcile apparent inconsistencies in other parts of the Exchange's proposed rules. The Commission believes that Amendment No. 3 raises no novel issues of regulatory concern, and is consistent with the Act. Therefore, the Commission finds good cause exists to accelerate approval of Amendment No. 3, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act. 59 59 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). IV. Solicitation of Comment Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning Amendment No. 3, including whether Amendment No. 3 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 *rules-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-NYSEArca-2006-13 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 Amendment No. 3 to File No. SR-NYSEArca-2006-13. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of NYSE Arca. 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 Amendment No. 3 to File No. SR-NYSEArca-2006-13 and should be submitted on or before August 28, 2006. V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 60 that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2006-13), as amended, be, and it hereby is, approved and Amendment No. 3 is approved on an accelerated basis. 60 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 61 61 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12705 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Disaster Declaration #10554; NEW YORK Disaster # NY-00024 Declaration of Economic Injury AGENCY: Small Business Administration. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Economic Injury Disaster Loan

(EIDL)declaration for the State of New York , dated 07/30/2006. *Incident:* Power Outage Precipitated by Extreme Heat and Rising Temperatures. *Incident Period:* 07/17/2006 and continuing. date: *Effective Date:* 07/31/2006. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:* 05/01/2007 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: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's EIDL declaration on 07/31/2006, applications for economic injury disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. *The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:* *Primary Counties:* Queens. *Contiguous Counties:* New York: Bronx, Kings, Nassau, New York. The Interest Rate is: 4.000. The number assigned to this disaster for economic injury is 105540. The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is New York. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59002). Dated: July 31, 2006. Steven C. Preston, Administrator. [FR Doc. E6-12730 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5484] Culturally Significant Object Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Avery Preesman” SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, *et seq.* ; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, *et seq.* ), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the object to be included in the exhibition “Avery Preesman”, imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, is of cultural significance. The object is imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit object at The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, from on or about September 17, 2006, until on or about October 29, 2006, and at possible additional venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, contact Paul Manning, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202/453-8052). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001. Dated: July 31, 2006. C. Miller Crouch, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E6-12765 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Fiscal Service Financial Management Service; Proposed Collection of Information: Electronic Funds Transfer

(EFT)Market Research Study AGENCY: Financial Management Service, Fiscal Service, Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Financial Management Service, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on a continuing information collection. By this notice, the Financial Management Service solicits comments concerning the “Electronic Funds Transfer

(EFT)Market Research Study.” DATES: Written comments should be received on or before October 6, 2006. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Financial Management Service, Records and Information Management Branch, Room 135, 3700 East West Highway, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Request for additional information should be directed to Edita Rickard, EFT Strategy Division, 401 14th Street, SW., Room 418D, Washington, DC 20227, 202-874-7165. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), the Financial Management Service solicits comments on the collection of information described below: *Title:* Electronic Funds Transfer

(EFT)Market Research Study. *OMB Number:* 1510-0074. *Form Number:* None. *Abstract:* Study of Federal benefit recipients to identify barriers to significant increases in use of EFT for benefit payments. *Current Action:* Extension of currently approved collection. *Type of Review:* Regular. *Affected Public:* Individuals or households. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 2,515. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 3 hours and 29 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 764. *Comments:* Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:

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

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

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and

(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance and purchase of services to provide information. Dated: July 27, 2006. Michael Colarusso, Acting Assistant Commissioner, Regional Operations. [FR Doc. 06-6735 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 37

Traces to 37 documents

CFR