Notices. Initiation of Reviews and Request for Comments on the Eligibility of Certain GSP Beneficiaries and Existing Competitive Need Limitation (CNL) Waivers
14,006 words·~64 min read·
/register/2006/08/08/06-6763A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE Generalized System of Preferences (GSP): Initiation of Reviews and Request for Public Comments AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Initiation of Reviews and Request for Comments on the Eligibility of Certain GSP Beneficiaries and Existing Competitive Need Limitation
(CNL)Waivers. SUMMARY: Legislation authorizing the Generalized System of Preferences
(GSP)program expires on December 31, 2006. In connection with Congress' consideration of reauthorization of the program, the Trade Policy Staff Committee
(TPSC)requested public comments on October 6, 2005, relating to whether the Administration's operation of the program should be changed so that benefits are not focused on trade from a few countries and that developing countries that traditionally have not been major traders under the program receive benefits. Based on information obtained thus far, the TPSC has decided to initiate a further review and request additional comments to determine whether major beneficiaries of the program have expanded exports or have progressed in their economic development within the meaning of the statute to the extent that their eligibility should be limited, suspended, or withdrawn, pursuant to section 502(d) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2462(d)). For the purpose of identifying beneficiary countries that are subject to this review and on which we are seeking comments, the TPSC looked at a country's total volume of trade under the GSP program, the World Bank's classification of the country's level of income, and the country's share of world goods exports. The TPSC is also conducting a review of existing competitive need limitation
(CNL)waivers and requesting comments on whether any waivers should be terminated, pursuant to section 503(d)(5) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(d)(5)), because they are no longer warranted due to changed circumstances. All public comments must be received by September 5, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to: *FR0052@USTR.EOP.GOV.* For assistance or if unable to submit comments by e-mail, contact the GSP Subcommittee, Office of the United States Trade Representative; USTR Annex, Room F-220; 1724 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508 (Tel. 202-395-6971). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact the GSP Subcommittee, Office of the United States Trade Representative; USTR Annex, Room F-220; 1724 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508 (Telephone: 202-395-6971, Facsimile: 202-395-9481). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The GSP Subcommittee is seeking written comments on whether to limit, suspend, or withdraw the eligibility of those GSP beneficiary countries for which the total value of U.S. imports under GSP exceeded $100 million in 2005, and
(a)which the World Bank classified as an upper-middle-income economy in 2005; or
(b)that accounted for more than 0.25 percent of world goods exports in 2005, as reported by the World Trade Organization. Thus, the TPSC is seeking comments on the eligibility status of the following GSP beneficiary developing countries: Argentina, Brazil, Croatia, India, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Philippines, Romania, Russia, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey, and Venezuela. The TPSC is also seeking comments on whether any of the 83 existing competitive need limitation
(CNL)waivers are no longer warranted due to changed circumstances. Country Eligibility Review The GSP statute authorizes the President to withdraw, suspend, or limit the application of duty-free treatment with respect to any country based on statutory eligibility criteria. See section 502(d) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 2462(d)). These criteria include:
(1)The effect such action will have on furthering the economic development of developing countries through the expansion of their exports;
(2)the extent of the beneficiary developing country's competitiveness with respect to eligible articles; and
(3)a country's level of economic development, including its per capita gross national product, the living standards of its inhabitants, and any other economic factors which the President deems appropriate. The GSP Subcommittee is seeking comments on whether the eligibility of any of these beneficiaries should be limited, suspended, or withdrawn based on the statutory eligibility criteria enumerated in sections 501(1) and
(4)and section 502(c)(2) of the Act. CNL Waiver Review Section 503(c)(2)(A) of the Act sets out the two competitive need limitations
(CNLs)applicable to eligible articles from beneficiary developing countries (other than sub-Saharan African and least-developed beneficiaries). When the President determines that a beneficiary developing country exported to the United States during a calendar year either
(1)A quantity of a GSP-eligible article having a value in excess of the applicable amount for that year ($120 million for 2005), or
(2)a quantity of a GSP-eligible article having a value equal to or greater than 50 percent of the value of total U.S. imports of the article from all countries (the “50 percent CNL”), the President must terminate GSP duty-free treatment for that article from that beneficiary developing country by no later than July 1 of the next calendar year. Under section 503(d) of the 1974 Act, the President may waive the application of section 503(c)(2) if the President
(1)Receives the advice of the International Trade Commission
(ITC)on whether any industry in the United States is likely to be adversely affected by such waiver;
(2)determines, based on the considerations in section 501 and 502(c) of the Act and the advice of the ITC that such waiver is in the national economic interest of the United States; and
(3)publishes the determination in the **Federal Register** . CNL waivers were first authorized by Congress in 1984. Nineteen GSP beneficiaries currently benefit from 83 CNL waivers. Under section 503(d)(5) of the Act, a waiver may be terminated if the President determines that it is no longer warranted due to changed circumstances. The GSP Subcommittee is seeking comments on whether any of the 83 existing waivers should be terminated pursuant to this provision of the statute. For a list of existing CNL waivers, see “CNL Waivers”, *http://www.ustr.gov/Trade_Development/Preference_Programs/GSP/Section_Index.html.* Requirements for Submission In order to facilitate prompt processing of submissions, USTR strongly urges and prefers electronic e-mail submissions only in response to this notice. Hand-delivered submissions will not be accepted. These submissions should be single-copy transmissions in English with the total submission, including attachments, not to exceed 30 single-spaced standard letter-size pages using 12-point font. E-mail submissions should use the following subject line: “2006 GSP Eligibility and CNL Waiver Review”. Comments on CNL waivers should include the 8-digit tariff number of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Documents must be submitted in English in one of the following formats: MSWord (.DOC), WordPerfect (.WPD), or text (.TXT) files. Documents may not be submitted as electronic image files or contain imbedded images (for example, “.JPG”, “.TIF”, “.PDF”, “.BMP”, or “.GIF”). Supporting documentation submitted as spreadsheets are acceptable as Excel files, formatted for printing on 8 1/2 × 11 inch paper. To the extent possible, any data attachments to the submission should be included in the same file as the submission itself, and not as separate files. If the submission contains business confidential information, a non-confidential version of the submission must also be submitted that indicates where confidential information was redacted by inserting asterisks where material was deleted. In addition, the confidential submission must be clearly marked “Business Confidential” at the top and bottom of each page of the document. The non-confidential version must also be clearly marked at the top and bottom of each page (either “Public Version” or “Non-Confidential”). Documents that are submitted without any marking will be considered public documents. For any document containing business confidential information submitted as an electronic attached file to an e-mail transmission, the file name of the business confidential version should begin with the characters “BC-”, and the file name of the public version should begin with the characters “P-”. The “ P-” or “BC-” should be followed by the name of the party (government, company, union, association, etc.) making the submission. E-mail submissions should not include separate cover letters or messages in the message area of the e-mail; information that might appear in any cover letter should be included directly in the attached file containing the submission itself, including the sender's e-mail address and other identifying information. The e-mail address for these submissions is *FR0052@USTR.EOP.GOV* . Documents not submitted in accordance with these instructions might not be considered in this review. If unable to provide submissions by e-mail, please contact the GSP Subcommittee to arrange for an alternative method of transmission. Public versions of all documents relating to this review will be available for review approximately two weeks after the due date by appointment in the USTR public reading room, 1724 F Street, NW., Washington, DC. Appointments may be made from 9:30 a.m. to noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, by calling
(202)395-6186. Marideth J. Sandler, Executive Director for the GSP Program, Chairman, GSP Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee. [FR Doc. E6-12870 Filed 8-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190-W6-P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE Generalized System of Preferences (GSP): Request for Public Comments on the Possible Withdrawal or Suspension of GSP Benefits With Respect to Romania AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Notice and solicitation of public comment. SUMMARY: As part of an ongoing country practice review, the GSP Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee
(TPSC)is considering whether to recommend that duty-free treatment accorded to imports from Romania under the U.S. GSP program be withdrawn or suspended on the grounds that Romania affords preferential treatment to the products of a developed country, other than the United States, which has, or is likely to have, a significant adverse effect on United States commerce. In addition, Romania adopted Veterinary Order 95 which includes requirements that:
(1)Individual U.S. poultry plants must be approved for export to the EU; and
(2)U.S. poultry producers must abide by EU welfare rules for slaughter. There are no EU-approved poultry facilities in the United States. The GSP Subcommittee is seeking public comments on whether, in view of the information provided in the petition, implementation of this new measure, and any additional information pertaining to the eligibility criteria set forth in the statute, Romania no longer meets one or more statutory criteria for GSP eligibility. All public comments must be received by Thursday, September 7, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to: *FR0618@ustr.eop.gov.* For assistance or if unable to submit comments by e-mail, contact the GSP Subcommittee, Office of the United States Trade Representative; USTR Annex, Room F-220; 1724 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508 (Tel. 202-395-6971). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact the GSP Subcommittee, Office of the United States Trade Representative; USTR Annex, Room F-220; 1724 F Street, NW.; Washington, DC 20508 (Telephone: 202-395-6971, Facsimile: 202-395-9481). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The GSP program is authorized pursuant to Title V of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (“the Trade Act”) (19 U.S.C. 2461 *et seq.* ). The GSP program grants duty-free treatment to designated eligible articles that are imported from designated beneficiary developing countries. Once granted, GSP benefits may be withdrawn, suspended, or limited by the President with respect to any country. (19 U.S.C. 2462(d)(1)). Romania is a designated beneficiary developing country under the GSP program. Possible Withdrawal or Suspension of GSP Benefits for Romania In 2002, the GSP Subcommittee received a petition from the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) requesting that Romania's eligibility for GSP benefits be terminated because Romania granted tariff preferences to EU distilled spirits and certain pharmaceuticals which have, or are likely to have, a significant adverse effect on United States commerce. These petitions were accepted for review in the 2005 Annual Review. On June 2, 2006, Romania adopted Veterinary Order 95. This Order affects all poultry meat shipments loaded for shipment to Romania after June 7, 2006, and includes requirements that:
(1)Individual U.S. poultry plants must be approved for export to the EU; and
(2)U.S. poultry producers must abide by EU welfare rules for slaughter. Romania will allow poultry certified under previous regulations until August 5, 2006. Requirements for Submissions All submissions must conform to the GSP regulations set forth at 15 CFR Part 2007, except as modified below. Comments must be submitted, in English, to the Chairman of the GSP Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee
(TPSC)as soon as possible, but not later than 5 p.m., September 7, 2006. In order to facilitate prompt consideration of submissions, USTR strongly prefers electronic e-mail submissions in response to this notice. Hand-delivered submissions will not be accepted. E-mail submissions should be single-copy transmissions in English with the total submission, including attachments, not to exceed 30 single-spaced standard letter-size pages using 12-point type. The e-mail transmission should use the following subject line: “Romania GSP Eligibility Review”. Documents must be submitted as MSWord (“.doc”), WordPerfect (“.wpd”), or text (“.txt”) files. Documents submitted as electronic image files or containing imbedded images (for example, “.jpg”, “.pdf”, “.bmp”, “.tif”, or “.gif”) will not be accepted. Spreadsheets submitted as supporting documentation are acceptable as Excel files, pre-formatted for printing only on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper. To the extent possible, any data attachments to the submission should be included in the same file as the submission itself, and not as separate files. Submissions in response to this notice will be subject to public inspection by appointment with the staff of the USTR Public Reading Room except for information granted “business confidential” status pursuant to 15 CFR 2003.6. If the submission contains business confidential information, a non-confidential version of the submission must also be submitted that indicates where confidential information was redacted by inserting asterisks where material was deleted. In addition, the confidential version must be clearly marked “BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL” at the top and bottom of each page of the document. The non-confidential version must be clearly marked “PUBLIC” or “NON-CONFIDENTIAL” at the top and bottom of each page. Documents that are submitted without any marking might not be accepted or will be considered public documents. For any document containing business confidential information submitted as an electronic attached file to an e-mail transmission, the file name of the business confidential version should begin with the characters “BC-”, and the file name of the public version should begin with the character “P-”. The “BC-” or “P-” should be followed by the name of the party (government, company, union, association, etc.) which is submitting the comments. E-mail submissions should not include separate cover letters or messages in the message area of the e-mail; information that might appear in any cover letter should be included directly in the attached file containing the submission itself, including the sender's identifying information with telephone number, fax number, and e-mail address. The e-mail address for these submissions is *FR0618@ustr.eop.gov.* Documents not submitted in accordance with these instructions might not be considered in this review. If unable to provide submissions by e-mail, please contact the GSP Subcommittee to arrange for an alternative method of transmission. Public versions of all documents relating to this review will be available for public review approximately three weeks after the due date by appointment in the USTR Public Reading Room, 1724 F Street, NW, Washington, DC. Availability of documents may be ascertained, and appointments may be made from 9:30 a.m. to noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, by calling 202-395-6186. Marideth J. Sandler, Executive Director for the GSP Program, Chairman, GSP Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee. [FR Doc. E6-12833 Filed 8-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190-W6-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54261; File No. SR-Amex-2006-69)] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to an Extension of a Pilot Program for the Fee Cap Program for Certain Options Spread Trades 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 American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which items have been substantially prepared by Amex. Amex has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge, pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. On July 28, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 5 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 5 In Amendment No. 1, Amex modified the statutory basis of the proposal from being Section 6(b)(5) of the Act to be Section 6(b)(4) of the Act. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to extend its fee cap program for dividend spreads, merger spreads and short stock interest spreads (the “Pilot Program”) for an additional six months through February 1, 2007. The text of the proposed rule change is available on Amex's Web site at *http://www.amex.com,* at the Office of the Secretary at Amex, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change, as amended, and discussed any comments it received on the proposal. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Pilot Program was established in February 2006. 6 The Exchange believes that the Pilot Program has operated, as designed, to allow the Exchange to become more competitive with fee cap programs in place at other options exchanges. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that a six-month extension is reasonable and consistent with the intent of the Pilot Program. 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53415 (March 3, 2006), 71 FR 12745 (March 13, 2006). The Pilot Program amended the Exchange's fee cap program that limits per trade the transaction, comparison and floor brokerage fees (hereinafter referred to collectively as “transaction-based fees”) charged to specialists, registered options traders, non-member market makers, member firms, broker dealers and non-member broker dealers (referred to hereinafter as “non-customer market participants”) for accommodation and spread trades. 7 The Pilot Program was put in place specifically for option transactions that are part of dividend spreads, 8 merger spreads, 9 and short stock interest spreads 10 and it amended the fee cap for such option transactions in the following manner: First, the Exchange proposed to convert the cap on transaction-based fees from a per trade cap to a cap on all transactions executed as part of these spreads on the same trading day in the same option class and to reduce the amount of fees charged before the cap is applied to $1,000 per day. Secondly, the Exchange proposed to add a monthly fee cap of $50,000 on transaction-based fees per initiating firm for transactions in dividend spreads, merger spreads and short stock interest spreads. The Exchange proposed to make these revisions to its fee cap program to match similar fee cap programs at other exchanges. 11 The Exchange implemented these two changes for option transactions that are part of dividend spreads, merger spreads, and short stock interest spreads on a pilot basis until August 1, 2006. 7 Accommodation trades (also known as cabinet trades) are transactions to close out positions in worthless or nearly worthless out-of-the-money option contracts. Spread trades include:
(i)Reversals and conversions,
(ii)dividend spreads,
(iii)box spreads,
(iv)butterfly spreads,
(v)merger spreads, and
(vi)short sock interest spreads. 8 A dividend spread transaction is defined as any trade done to achieve a dividend arbitrage between any two deep-in-the-money options. 9 A merger spread transaction is defined as a transaction executed pursuant to a merger spread strategy involving the simultaneous purchase and sale of options of the same option class and expiration date, but different strike prices followed by the exercise of the resulting long option position. Merger spreads are executed prior to the date that shareholders of record in a stock subject to a merger are required to elect their respective form of consideration ( *i.e.* , cash or stock). 10 A short stock interest spread is defined as a spread that uses two deep in-the-money put options followed by the exercise of the resulting long position of the same class in order to establish a short stock interest arbitrage position. This strategy is used to capture short stock interest. 11 *See* PCX Options Fee Schedule and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53171 (January 24, 2006), 71 FR 5090 (January 31, 2006) (SR-CBOE 2005-117). To date, the Exchange believes that the Pilot Program has been beneficial to the Exchange because it has brought more business to the Exchange. In this manner, non-customer market participants are encouraged to bring more order flow to the Exchange increasing competition among all option exchanges. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that an extension of the Pilot Program for six months through February 1, 2007 is warranted. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 12 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4), 13 in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to implement revisions to a fee cap program that is competitive with similar programs at other options exchanges. 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange believes that proposed rule change will not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing rule change, as amended, has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 14 and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder 15 because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 16 14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 15 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 16 The effective date of the original proposed rule change is July 20, 2006, the date of the original filing, and the effective date of Amendment No.1 is July 28, 2006, the filing date of the amendment. For purposes of calculating the 60-day abrogation period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change, as amended, under Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission considers the period to commence on July 28, 2006, the date on which the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-Amex-2006-69 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2006-69. 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 Amex. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2006-69 and should be submitted on or before August 29, 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. E6-12839 Filed 8-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54262; File No. SR-Amex-2006-64] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to a Retroactive Suspension of Transaction Charges for Specialist Orders in the Nasdaq-100 Tracking Stock®
(QQQQ)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 7, 2006, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) submitted to 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 Amex. On July 27, 2006, the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 Amendment No. 1 replaced and superseded the original filing in its entirety. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to retroactively apply a suspension of transaction charges for specialist orders in connection with the trading of the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock® (Symbol: QQQQ) from July 1, 2006 through July 12, 2006. The text of the proposed rule change is available on Amex's Web site ( *http://www.amex.com* ), at Amex's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change, as amended, and discussed any comments it received on the proposal. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below, and is set forth in Sections A, B, and C below. Amex 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 The Exchange proposes to retroactively apply a suspension of transaction charges for specialist orders in the QQQQ from July 1, 2006 through July 12, 2006. The Exchange previously extended the suspension of the QQQQ from March 1, 2006 through June 30, 2006. 4 The Exchange, in a companion filing, also proposed the adoption of a suspension of transaction charges for specialist orders in the Nasdaq-100 Tracking Stock
(QQQQ)from July 13, 2006 through August 31, 2006. 5 In order to waive transaction fees for specialist orders in the QQQQ from July 1, 2006 through August 31, 2006, the Exchange has proposed to retroactively suspend transaction fees for specialist transactions from July 1, 2006 through July 12, 2006. 4 *See, e.g.* , Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53871 (May 25, 2006), 71 FR 31236 (June 1, 2006) and 54094 (July 3, 2006), 71 FR 39135 (July 11, 2006) (SR-Amex-2006-42) (retroactively applying a suspension of transaction charges for specialist orders in connection with the trading of the QQQQ from March 1, 2006, through April 5, 2006). *See also* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53701 (April 21, 2006), 71 FR 25253 (April 28, 2006) (SR-Amex-2006-30) (suspending specialist transaction charges in connection with the QQQQ from April 6, 2006, through June 30, 2006). 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54227 (July 27, 2006). Specialist orders currently are charged $0.0034 ($0.34 per 100 shares), capped at $300 per trade (88,235 shares). Effective December 1, 2004, the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock ® (formerly “QQQ”) transferred its listing from Amex to The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc (“Nasdaq”). It now trades on Nasdaq under the symbol QQQQ. After the transfer, Amex began trading QQQQ on an unlisted trading privileges basis. The Exchange believes that the retroactive suspension of transaction charges for specialist transactions in the QQQQ from July 1, 2006 through July 12, 2006 is consistent with the adoption of the proposal to suspend transaction charges for specialist orders generally in the QQQQ through August 31, 2006. The Exchange further believes that a retroactive suspension of transaction fees on specialist orders in the QQQQ is appropriate to enhance the competitiveness of executions on Amex. The Exchange proposes to amend the Amex Fee Schedule to indicate that transaction charges for specialist orders in the QQQQ have been suspended from July 1, 2006 through August 31, 2006. As provided in the companion filing, the Exchange submits that a suspension of transaction fees for specialist orders in connection with the QQQQ is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act. 6 Specifically, the Exchange believes that suspending transaction charges for QQQQ specialist orders is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees among Exchange members. The Exchange believes that the fact that specialists have greater obligations than other members and are also subject to other Exchange fees, in addition to transaction fees, supports this proposal to retroactively apply the fee suspension. 6 Section 6(b)(4) states that the rules of a national securities exchange must provide for an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). The Exchange notes that specialists are subject to a variety of Exchange fees other than transaction charges, such as a floor clerk fee, a floor facility fee, a post fee, and a registration fee. 7 In addition, specialists and other floor members of the Exchange are subject to technology and membership fees. 8 Certain market participants, such as customers, non-member broker-dealers and market-makers, and member broker-dealers, are not subject to the majority of these fees. In addition, a specialist unit, in order to adequately “make a market” in assigned securities, must be sufficiently staffed 9 and have adequate technology resources to handle the volume of orders (especially in the QQQQ) that are sent to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that these operational costs borne by specialists further support the proposal to temporarily suspend QQQQ transaction fees on specialist orders. 7 The floor clerk, floor facility, post, and registration fees, on an annual basis, are $900, $2,400, $1,000, and $800, respectively. 8 A technology fee of $6,000 per year is assessed on all specialists and other floor participants at the Exchange. Annual membership dues of $1,500 must be paid by all members while annual membership fees are payable depending on the type of membership and circumstances. Non-members are not subject to these fees. 9 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53386 (February 28, 2006), 71 FR 11250 (March 6, 2006) (requiring specialists to employ an adequate number of clerks). Specialists have certain obligations under Exchange rules, as well as the Act, that do not exist for other market participants. For example, pursuant to Amex Rule 170, a specialist is required to maintain a fair and orderly market in his or her assigned securities. Other members of the Exchange, as well as non-member market participants, do not have this obligation. As a result, the Exchange believes that the proposed retroactive suspension of transaction charges for specialist orders in the QQQQ is reasonable and equitable, given the obligations that specialists must adhere to in making markets. The Exchange further submits that the fee suspension will provide greater incentive to specialists to continue to provide market liquidity, rendering the Exchange an attractive venue for market participants to execute orders. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 10 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 11 in particular, and is an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange 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 1934 Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period
(i)as the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii)as to which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:
(A)By order approve such proposed rule change, as amended, 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. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-Amex-2006-64 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-Amex-2006-64. 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 Amex. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2006-64 and should be submitted on or before August 29, 2006. 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12842 Filed 8-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURTITES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION / [Release No. 34-54260; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-024] 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 7000 Series Rules 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 31, 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 filed the proposed rule change as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Nasdaq proposes to conform the Rule 7000 Series of Nasdaq's rules to certain changes made to the Rule 7000 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 on August 1, 2006. The text of the proposed rule change is available on Nasdaq's Web site at *http://www.nasdaq.com* , at the principal office of Nasdaq, 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 Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Nasdaq is modifying its 7000 Series Rules to reflect certain changes made to the Rule 7000 Series of the rules of NASD since approval of Nasdaq's rules by the Commission in January 2006 and to correct certain errors in the approved rules. Specifically, Nasdaq is: • Amending Nasdaq Rule 7015 to reflect changes to NASD Rule 7010(f) by SR-NASD-2006-026, SR-NASD-2006-027, and SR-NASD-2006-043. 5 The amendments to Nasdaq Rule 7015 also reflect prior Commission approvals for the application of NASD Rule 7010(f) to non-members, such as service bureaus, that obtain access services from Nasdaq. 5 Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53536 (March 21, 2006), 71 FR 15784 (March 29, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-026); 53535 (March 21, 2006), 71 FR 15788 (March 29, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-027); and 53617 (April 7, 2006), 71 FR 19597 (April 14, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-043). • Amending Nasdaq Rule 7017 to restore a pilot program for NQDS fees for non-professional users 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-2006-009. 6 6 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53255 (February 8, 2006), 71 FR 8016 (February 15, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-009). • Amending Nasdaq Rule 7021 to reflect changes to NASD Rule 7010(n) made by SR-NASD-2006-072. 7 • Adding NASDAQ Rule 7034 to reflect the addition of Inet connectivity fees to NASD Rule 7010(w) in SR-NASD-2005-147 and SR-NASD-2005-148 8 and subsequent amendments to the Rule by SR-NASD-2006-013, SR-NASD-2006-031 and SR-NASD-2006-032. 9 7 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54002 (June 16, 2006), 71 FR 36143 (June 23, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-072). 8 Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53005 (December 22, 2005), 70 FR 77215 (December 29, 2005) (SR-NASD-2005-147); and 53006 (December 22, 2005), 70 FR 77220 (March 29, 2006) (SR-NASD-2005-148). 9 Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53256 (February 8, 2006), 71 FR 8020 (February 15, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-013); 53504 (March 16, 2006), 71 FR 14760 (March 23, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-031); and 53505 (March 16, 2006), 71 FR 14758 (March 23, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-032). • Adding Nasdaq Rule 7035 to reflect the addition of NASD Rule 7010(x) in SR-NASD-2006-030. 10 10 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54005 (June 16, 2006), 71 FR 36145 (June 23, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-030). • Adding Nasdaq Rule 7036 to reflect the addition of NASD Rule 7010(y) in SR-NASD-2006-056. 11 11 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54003 (June 16, 2006), 71 FR 36141 (June 23, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-056). • Amending Nasdaq Rules 7011, 7025, 7028, and 7033 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, 12 in general, and with Sections 6(b)(4) and
(5)of the Act, 13 in particular, in that the proposal provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility or system which Nasdaq operates or controls, and is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove 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. Nasdaq believes the proposed rule change conforms the Rule 7000 Series of Nasdaq's rules to certain changes made to the Rule 7000 Series of NASD rules since approval of Nasdaq's rules by the Commission in January 2006 and corrects certain errors in the approved rules. 12 15 U.S.C. 78f. 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (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 Because the forgoing rule change does not:
(1)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)become operative for 30 days after the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 14 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 15 14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 15 17 CFR 240.19b4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 16 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 17 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Nasdaq provided the Commission with written notice of its intent to file this proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing the proposed rule change. In addition, Nasdaq has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-operative delay, and the Commission hereby grants that request. 18 The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day pre-operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest because it 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, at the time when Nasdaq begins to operate as a national securities exchange. 16 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 17 *Id.* 18 For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day pre-operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-024 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 No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-024. 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 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 No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-024 and should be submitted on or before August 29, 2006. 19 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 19 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12840 Filed 8-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54255; File No. SR-NYSE-2005-03] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 To Amend Exchange Rule 325 (Capital Requirements for Member Organizations), Rule 326 (Growth Capital Requirement, Business Reduction Capital Requirement, Unsecured Loans and Advances), and Rule 431 (Margin Requirement) July 31, 2006. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 3 notice is hereby given that on January 5, 2005, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or the “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. 4 The NYSE filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change on February 13, 2006. 5 The NYSE filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change on March 17, 2006. 6 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 15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* 3 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 4 Pursuant to discussions with the Commission staff, the Exchange clarified the application of proposed amendments to NYSE Rules 325, 326 and 431 to reflect the Exchange's March 7, 2006 merger with Archipelago Holdings, Inc. (“Archipelago”), adjustments to capital levels in Rule 326 and other general editorial changes. Telephone conversations between William Jannace, Director, Exchange, William Wollman, Vice President, Exchange and E. David Hwa, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, on May 11, 2006, June 8, 2006, July 19, 2006 and email dated July 19, 2006. 5 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange clarified the application of proposed amendments to NYSE Rule 431(e)(9) solely to OTC derivatives transactions and expanded upon elements of the written risk analysis provided by the proposed rule for member organizations utilizing the alternative method of computing net capital. 6 In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange clarified the application of proposed amendments to NYSE Rule 326 to make explicit the ability of the Exchange to restrict the growth or business of a member organization, respectively, when its tentative net capital declines below the early warning notification amount required by the Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1(a)(7)(ii). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 325, Rule 326, and Rule 431 to reflect recent SEC rule amendments under the Exchange Act, including amendments to Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1 that established an alternative method of computing net capital for broker-dealers. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Background Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1 (the “net capital rule”) contains basic financial responsibility standards for broker-dealers. The rule is intended to protect customers and other market participants from broker-dealer failures, and to enable those firms that fall below the minimum net capital requirements to liquidate in an orderly fashion without the need for a formal proceeding or financial assistance from the Securities Investor Protection Corporation. To help insure that broker-dealers maintain sufficient liquid assets to satisfy promptly the claims of customers and cover potential market and credit risks, the net capital rule requires broker-dealers to maintain different minimum levels of capital based upon the nature of their business and whether they handle customer funds or securities. On August 20, 2004, the SEC adopted rule amendments under the Exchange Act, including amendments to Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1, that establish a voluntary, alternative method of computing net capital for certain large broker-dealers that are part of consolidated supervised groups referred to as consolidated supervised entities (“CSEs”). Under the SEC amendments, a broker-dealer may use this “alternative/CSE” method only if its ultimate holding company agrees to compute group-wide allowable capital and allowances for market, credit, and operational risk in accordance with the standards adopted by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, and consents to group-wide SEC supervision. The alternative method of computing net capital permits a broker-dealer to use models, such as “value-at-risk” (“VAR”) models and scenario analysis, 7 that are already part of its internal risk management control system to calculate the market risk and derivatives-related credit risk components of its net capital requirement. The deduction for market risk calculated using internal models replaces the traditional “haircut” approach to calculating net capital. 8 7 Value-at risk models assess market risk based on the probability distribution for a portfolio's market value. Scenario analysis is a method of assessing market risk by testing various possible scenarios. 8 The “haircut” approach to computing net capital involves reducing the value of firms” proprietary securities by pre-determined percentages to allow for potential reductions in market value. When the Membership allow their net capital to decline below certain levels, they risk non-compliance with the net capital and financial responsibility requirements of Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1. NYSE Rules 325 and 326 are designed to alert the Exchange before such problems occur, and to enable the Exchange to prevent Membership non-compliance by restricting the business activities of any member organization whose net capital falls below certain defined levels. Proposed Amendment to NYSE Rule 325 NYSE Rule 325, the Exchange's primary net capital rule, requires the Membership to comply with Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1 and imposes additional prophylactic requirements to ensure such compliance. Rule 325(b) requires a member organization to notify the Exchange if its net capital falls below certain percentages. The proposed amendment adds Rule 325(b)(3), which would require a member organization to provide concurrently to the Exchange a copy of any report or notification made to the SEC pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 17a-11 9 or Commodities Exchange Act (“CEA”) 10 Regulation 1.12. 11 9 17 CFR 240.17a-11. 10 7 U.S.C. 1 *et seq.* 11 17 CFR 1.12. This new requirement is necessary to help ensure that the Exchange continues to receive timely notification of potential violations of Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1, including the rule's new CSE provisions. For example, as noted above, Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1, in conjunction with Exchange Act Rule 17a-11, now requires a broker-dealer that elects to use the alternative method of computing net capital to report to the SEC whenever its tentative net capital declines below $5 billion. Proposed Rule 325(b)(3) would require a member organization to provide the Exchange with copies of every such report. Language in Rule 325(b) regarding notification to the Exchange relating to CEA minimum capital requirements for members or member organizations acting as futures commission merchants was rendered obsolete by amendments to CEA Regulation 1.17 12 on September 30, 2004 13 and, therefore, has been removed from the amended Rule 325(b). The proposed new provisions of Rule 325(b)(3), however, would require a member organization to provide the Exchange with copies of any reports or notifications it provides to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) under CEA Regulation 1.12. Therefore, because CEA Regulation 1.12 requires notification by any futures commission merchant that experiences a decline in net capital below the CEA's early warning levels, the Exchange will continue to receive notification if a member organization acting as futures commission merchant is in danger of violating CEA minimum capital requirements. 12 17 CFR 1.17. 13 The CEA amendments eliminated capital requirement calculations based on the concept of “segregated funds.” The Exchange's merger with Archipelago rendered the Exchange's constitution obsolete so paragraphs
(5)and
(6)of Rule 325(e) and all references to the constitution were removed. Other grammatical changes have been made throughout Rule 325 for purposes of clarity and stylistic consistency. Proposed Amendment to NYSE Rule 326 NYSE Rule 326, which enables the Exchange to restrict a member organization's business activities if its net capital falls below certain defined levels, uses a two-step approach to preventing Membership non-compliance with Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1. First, Rule 326(a) allows the Exchange to prohibit a member organization from expanding its business if its net capital falls below specified levels. Second, if a member organization's net capital falls below lower, specified levels, Rule 326(b) allows the Exchange to compel it to reduce its existing business. To enable the Exchange to regulate its Membership proactively (that is, to act if a member or member organization is in danger of violating Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1, rather than waiting until Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1 has been violated), the levels specified in NYSE Rule 326 are higher than those contained in Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1. The proposed amendments would add Rule 326(a)(4) to provide minimum tentative net capital 14 and net capital levels for the Exchange to use when prohibiting, under Rule 326(a), the expansion of business by a member organization using the alternative method computing net capital under the CSE rules. The levels proposed in Rule 326(a)(1)(d) (50 percent of the tentative net capital level that triggers SEC notification or the net capital level is less than $1.25 billion) will not unduly restrict a member organization's business, but will allow the Exchange, after evaluating a member organization's financial condition, to use the disincentive of restricted business expansion to encourage a member organization whose net capital has fallen to levels that risk violation of Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1 to take necessary corrective action. 14 The term “tentative net capital,” as it pertains to the new regulations regarding broker-dealers using the “alternative/CSE” method, is defined in Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1(c)(15), part of the SEC's new CSE regulations. Language in Rule 326(a) regarding limiting a member organization's expansion of business due to CEA minimum capital requirements for a member organization acting as futures commission merchant was rendered obsolete by the aforementioned amendments to CEA Regulation 1.17, and, therefore, has been removed from the amended Rule 326(a). The proposed amendment would add Rule 326(b)(1)(d) to provide minimum tentative net capital and net capital levels for the Exchange to use in requiring a member organization that uses the alternative method of computing net capital to reduce its business pursuant to Rule 326(b). The levels proposed in Rule 326(b)(1)(d) (40 percent of the tentative net capital level that triggers SEC notification or net capital less than $1 billion) would not unduly restrict a member organization's business, but would allow the Exchange, after evaluating a member organization's financial condition, to use the disincentive of mandatory business reduction to encourage necessary corrective action by a member organization whose net capital has fallen to levels that risk violation of Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1. Language in Rule 326(b) regarding the reduction of a member organization's business due to CEA minimum capital requirements for a member organization acting as futures commission merchant was rendered obsolete by the aforementioned amendments to CEA Regulation 1.17, and, therefore, has been removed from the amended Rule 326(b). The proposed new provisions of Rule 326(b)(1)(e), however, would require a member organization to reduce its business if its net capital falls below 110 percent of the minimum capital requirements of CEA Regulation 1.17 (the same level that triggers notification to the CFTC under CEA Regulation 1.12). Therefore, the Exchange will retain the ability to compel a member organization to reduce its business if its net capital falls to levels that may violate CEA minimum capital requirements. Other grammatical changes have been made throughout Rule 326 for purposes of accuracy, clarity, and stylistic consistency. Proposed Amendment to NYSE Rule 431 Section 7(a) 15 of the Exchange Act empowers the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to prescribe the rules and regulations regarding the credit that may be extended by broker-dealers on securities (Regulation T 16 ). NYSE Rule 431 prescribes specific margin requirements that must be maintained in all of a member organization's customer accounts, based on the type of securities products held in such accounts. 15 15 U.S.C. 78g(a). 16 12 CFR 220 *et seq.* Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1e(c), 17 one of the recent SEC amendments related to the alternative method of computing net capital for CSE broker-dealers, prescribes deductions to net capital for credit risk on transactions in certain derivative instruments for broker-dealers using the alternative method (for example, VAR models), provided the broker-dealers have in place comprehensive internal risk management procedures that address market, credit, liquidity, legal, and operational risk at the firm. 17 17 CFR 240.15c3-1e(c). The proposed amendment to Rule 431 would add Rule 431(e)(9). This new paragraph would exempt a member organization using the alternative method of computing net capital from Rule 431 for certain exposures arising from transactions in over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivative instruments 18 for which the member organization may compute a deduction to net capital for credit risk using the methods contained in Rule 15c3-1e(c). 18 These instruments are described in Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1e(c)(vi)(E), 17 CFR 240.15c3-1e(c)(vi)(E). A member organization that applies Rule 431(e)(9) must maintain a written risk analysis methodology for assessing the amount of credit that may be extended with respect to OTC derivatives transactions and the methodology must include at least those procedures and guidelines enumerated in paragraph (e)(9). The procedures and guidelines relate to reviewing customer account documentation and financial information; establishing credit limits for customers; monitoring the member organization's credit risk exposure to its customers; management reporting on credit extension exposure; managing the impact of credit extension on the member organization's overall risk exposure; the appropriate management response to violations of credit extension limits; stress testing customer accounts individually and in the aggregate; and determining whether to collect margin from a particular customer. The member organization must establish a method for period review of these procedures by an independent unit of the organization, such as internal audit or risk management. Management also must review periodically the member organization's credit extension activities for consistency with the guidelines. 2. Statutory Basis The proposed amendments to NYSE Rules 325, 326, and 431 are consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) 19 of the Exchange Act, which requires that the rules of the Exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest in that they incorporate into the Exchange's rules recent SEC amendments to Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1 regarding the alternative method of computing net capital for broker-dealers that are part of a CSE. 19 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange believes that the proposal does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received from Members, Participants or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period
(i)As the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii)as to which the Exchange consents, the Commission will: A. By order approve such proposed rule change, or B. institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Exchange Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2005-03 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2005-03. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the NYSE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File number SR-NYSE-2005-03 and should be submitted on or before August 29, 2006. 20 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 20 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12841 Filed 8-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54257; File No. SR-Phlx-2006-46] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Extending the Specialist Option Transaction Charge Credit Pilot Program 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 21, 2006, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange has designated this proposal as one establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by a self-regulatory organization pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to extend for a one-year period, until July 31, 2007, its current pilot program that provides for an option transaction charge credit of $0.21 per contract for Exchange options specialist units 5 that incur Phlx option transaction charges when a customer order is delivered to the limit order book via the Exchange's Options Floor Broker Management System (“FBMS”) 6 and is then sent to an away market and executed via the Intermarket Option Linkage (“Linkage”) under the Plan for the Purpose of Creating and Operating an Intermarket Option Linkage (“Plan”) 7 as a Principal Acting as Agent Order (“P/A Order”). 8 5 The terms “specialist” and “specialist unit” are used interchangeably. 6 The FBMS is a component of the Exchange's Automated Options Market (AUTOM) System designed to enable Floor Brokers and/or their employees to enter, route and report transactions stemming from options orders received on the Exchange. The FBMS also is designed to establish an electronic audit trail for options orders represented and executed by Floor Brokers on the Exchange, such that the audit trail provides an accurate, time-sequenced record of electronic and other orders, quotations and transactions on the Exchange, beginning with the receipt of an order by the Exchange, and further documenting the life of the order through the process of execution, partial execution, or cancellation of that order. *See* Phlx Rule 1080, Commentary .06. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 43086 (July 28, 2000), 65 FR 48023 (August 4, 2000); and 43573 (November 16, 2000), 65 FR 70851 (November 28, 2000) (order approving Phlx as a participant in the Plan). 8 A P/A order is an order for the principal account of a specialist (or equivalent entity on another participant exchange that is authorized to represent public customer orders), reflecting the terms of a related unexecuted public customer order for which the specialist is acting as agent. *See* Phlx Rule 1083(k)(i). The pilot program in effect is currently scheduled to expire on July 31, 2006. 9 The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Commission's Public Reference Room, at the Office of the Secretary of the Exchange, and on the Exchange's Web site at *http://www.Phlx.com* . 9 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53761 (May 5, 2006), 71 FR 27768 (May 12, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-20). This proposal is scheduled to be in effect for the same time period as fees for Linkage Principal Orders (“P Orders”) and P/A Orders. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54233 (July 27, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-44). II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Currently, the Exchange provides an option transaction charge credit of $0.21 per contract for Exchange options specialist units that incur Phlx option transaction charges when a customer order is delivered to the limit order book via FBMS and is then sent to an away market and executed via Linkage under the Plan as a P/A Order. The purpose of this proposal is to continue to alleviate the potential economic burden of multiple transaction charges imposed on Exchange specialist units by establishing a credit for Exchange option transaction charges incurred by an Exchange specialist unit when a customer limit order placed on the limit order book by a Floor Broker 10 results in an execution of a P/A Order that is sent to another exchange via Linkage. The Exchange believes that continuing to give an options transaction charge credit of $0.21 per contract should encourage the use of Linkage and should allow the Exchange to remain competitive with other exchanges with respect to the assessment of Linkage-related fees. 11 10 A Floor Broker who wishes to place a limit order on the limit order book must submit such a limit order electronically through the FBMS. *See* Phlx Rule 1063, Commentary .01. *See also* Phlx Rule 1080, Commentary .02(b). 11 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53372 (February 24, 2006), 71 FR 11003 (March 3, 2006) (SR-CBOE-2006-10) (rebate of certain transaction fees to Designated Primary Market Makers related to the execution of outbound P/A orders) and 53526 (March 21, 2006), 71 FR 15794 (March 29, 2006) (SR-PCX-2006-19) (creating a credit associated with the fees a Market Maker is charged for executions that result from P/A Orders sent to and executed at away market centers). *See also* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54064 (June 28, 2006), 71 FR 38438 (July 6, 2006) (SR-CBOE-2006-59). This proposal is to remain in effect as a pilot program until July 31, 2007. 12 12 This proposal is in connection with an existing pilot program for Linkage P and P/A Orders and is in effect for the same time period as the pilot program for Linkage P and P/A Orders. The Exchange filed a separate proposed rule change to extend the fees for Linkage P and P/A orders for a one-year period until July 31, 2007. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54233, *supra* at note 9. *See also* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53650 (April 13, 2006), 71 FR 20430 (April 20, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-22) and 53761 (May 5, 2006), 71 FR 27768 (May 12, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-20). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its schedule of fees is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 13 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 14 in particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees and other charges among Exchange members. 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others No written comments were either solicited or received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge applicable only to a member pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 15 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder. 16 Accordingly, the proposal took effect upon filing with the Commission. 15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 16 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 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. 17 17 *See* Section 19(b)(3)(C), 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2006-46 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2006-46. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2006-46 and should be submitted on or before August 29, 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. E6-12838 Filed 8-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Request and Comment Request The Social Security Administration
(SSA)publishes a list of information collection packages that will require clearance by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)in compliance with Pub. L. 104-13, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, effective October 1, 1995. The information collection packages that may be included in this notice are for new information collections and revisions to OMB-approved information collections. SSA is soliciting comments on the accuracy of the agency's burden estimate; the need for the information; its practical utility; ways to enhance its quality, utility, and clarity; and on ways to minimize burden on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Written comments and recommendations regarding the information collection(s) should be submitted to the OMB Desk Officer and the SSA Reports Clearance Officer. The information can be mailed and/or faxed to the individuals at the addresses and fax numbers listed below:
(OMB)Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for SSA, Fax: 202-395-6974;
(SSA)Social Security Administration, DCFAM, Attn: Reports Clearance Officer, 1333 Annex Building, 6401 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21235, Fax: 410-965-6400. I. The information collection listed below is pending at SSA and will be submitted to OMB within 60 days from the date of this notice. Therefore, your comments should be submitted to SSA within 60 days from the date of this publication. You can obtain copies of the collection instrument by calling the SSA Reports Clearance Officer at 410-965-0454 or by writing to the address listed above. 1. Vendor List Registration Form—0960-NEW. The Social Security Administration
(SSA)maintains an Employer Wage Reporting and Instructions Vendor Web site. On this site, relevant vendors are allowed to list their products and services free of charge. Vendors wishing to list their information on the site can submit these requests via a written registration form, and will soon be able to use a new electronic means of submitting the information through the Web site itself. The respondents are vendors dealing with vendors who offer employer wage reporting services and want SSA to list their information on its Web site. *Type of Request:* New information collection. *Number of Respondents:* 500. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden Per Response:* 8 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 67 hours. II. The information collections listed below have been submitted to OMB for clearance. Your comments on the information collections would be most useful if received by OMB and SSA within 30 days from the date of this publication. You can obtain a copy of the OMB clearance packages by calling the SSA Reports Clearance Officer at 410-965-0454 or by writing to the address listed above. 1. Function Report—Adult—20 CFR 404.1512 and 419.912—0960-0681. Form SSA-3373 is used to collect information about a disability applicant's impairment-related limitations and ability to function. It documents the types of information specified in SSA regulations and provides disability interviewers with a convenient means to record information about how the claimant's condition affects his or her ability to function. This information, together with medical evidence, forms the evidentiary basis upon which the initial disability process is founded. The respondents are Title II and Title XVI benefits applicants. *Type of Request:* Revision to an OMB-approved information collection. *Number of Respondents:* 4,005,367. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden Per Response:* 60 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 4,005,367 hours. 2. Certificate of Incapacity—5 CFR 890.302(d)—0960-NEW. Rules governing the Federal Employee Health Benefits
(FEHB)plan state that for federal employees' children ages 22 or over to retain health benefits, they must be incapable of self-support due to a disability that
(1)pre-dated the child's 22nd birthday,
(2)is very serious, and
(3)can be expected to last at least one year. Form SSA-604, the Certificate of Incapacity, is used by physicians to document and certify such a disability for their patients who are children of federal employees. The respondents are physicians of federal employees' children ages 22 or over who are seeking to retain health benefits under their parent's FEHB coverage. *Type of Request:* New information collection. *Number of Respondents:* 38. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden Per Response:* 45 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 29 hours. 3. SSA Survey of Ticket to Work Beneficiaries—0960-NEW. The Social Security Administration
(SSA)plans to survey two groups of Social Security beneficiaries who qualified for the Ticket to Work program. The first group consists of those beneficiaries who did choose to enter the program, while those in the second group did not. The information gathered by the survey will be used to assess and contrast the social and media interaction preferences of these beneficiaries, both on a general level and specifically in relation to media preferences for the Ticket to Work program. SSA will use this information to determine what role, if any, the type of media outlet SSA used played in a beneficiary's decision to join the Ticket to Work program and to improve interactions with potential Ticket to Work program participants. The respondents are Social Security beneficiaries who qualified for the Ticket to Work program. *Type of Request:* New information collection. *Number of Respondents:* 800. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden Per Response:* 15 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 200 hours. Dated: August 2, 2006. Elizabeth A. Davidson, Reports Clearance Officer, Social Security Administration. [FR Doc. E6-12803 Filed 8-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4191-02-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5485] Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Louis Comfort Tiffany and Laurelton Hall—An Artist's Country Estate” SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, *et seq.* ; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, *et seq.* ), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the exhibition “Louis Comfort Tiffany and Laurelton Hall—An Artist's Country Estate,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York, from on or about November 20, 2006, until on or about May 20, 2007, and at possible additional venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Wolodymyr Sulzymsky, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202/453-8050). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001. Dated: July 21, 2006. C. Miller Crouch, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E6-12871 Filed 8-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Notice of Intent To Request Revision From the Office of Management and Budget of a Currently Approved Information Collection Activity, Request for Comments; Notice and Approval of Airport Noise and Access Restrictions AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The FAA invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)to approve a current information collection. Respondents are airport operators proposing voluntary agreement and/or mandatory restrictions on Stage 2 and Stage 3 aircraft operations, and aircraft operators that request reevaluation of a restriction. DATES: Please submit comments by October 10, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carla Mauney on
(202)267-9895, or by e-mail at: *Carla.Mauney@faa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA)*Title:* Notice and Approval of Airport Noise and Access Restrictions. *Type of Request:* Revision of an approved collection. *OMB Control Number:* 2120-0563. *Forms(s):* There are no FAA forms associated with this collection. *Affected Public:* A total of 8 Respondents. *Frequency:* The information is collected on occasion. *Estimated Average Burden Per Response:* Approximately 3750 hours per response. *Estimated Annual Burden Hours:* An estimated 30,000 hours annually. *Abstract:* The Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 mandates the formulation of a national noise policy. One part of that mandate is the development of a national program to review noise and access restrictions on the operation of stage 2 and 3 aircraft. 14 CFR Part 161 is the principal means. Respondents are airport operators proposing voluntary agreement and/or mandatory restrictions on Stage 2 and Stage 3 aircraft operations, and aircraft operators that request reevaluation of a restriction. ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA at the following address: Ms. Carla Mauney, Room 1033, Federal Aviation Administration, Information Systems and Technology Services Staff, ABA-20, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591. *Comments are invited on:* Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimates of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Issued in Washington, DC, on August 1, 2006. Carla Mauney, FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, Information Systems and Technology Services Staff, ABA-20. [FR Doc. 06-6763 Filed 8-7-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 19
Traces to 19 documents
U.S. Code
- Designation of beneficiary developing countries§ 2462
- Designation of eligible articles§ 2463
- Authority to extend preferences§ 2461
- Registration, responsibilities, and oversight of self-regulatory organizations§ 78s
- National securities exchanges§ 78f
- Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings§ 552
- Definitions and application§ 78c
- Short title§ 78a
- Short title§ 1
- Margin requirements§ 78g
- Immunity from seizure under judicial process of cultural objects imported for temporary exhibition or display§ 2459
- Purposes§ 6501
CFR
- Information exempt from public inspection.§ 2003.6
- Delegation of authority to Director of Division of Trading and Markets.§ 200.30-3
- Maintenance of minimum financial requirements by futures commission merchants and introducing brokers.§ 1.12
- Minimum financial requirements for futures commission merchants and introducing brokers.§ 1.17
- Responsibility for evidence.§ 404.1512
register
public-private-law
9 references not yet in our index
- 15 CFR 2007
- 17 CFR 240.19
- 17 CFR 240.17
- 12 CFR 220
- 17 CFR 240.15
- Pub. L. 104-13
- 5 CFR 890.302(d)
- 79 Stat. 985
- 14 CFR 161
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Initiation of Reviews and Request for Comments on the Eligibility of Certain GSP Beneficiaries and Existing Competitive Need Limitation (CNL) Waivers
Cite15 CFR 2007
Cite17 CFR 240.19
Cite17 CFR 240.17
Cites 28 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources