Notices. Notice

10,665 words·~48 min read·/register/2006/08/23/06-7125

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

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY: National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: NARA is giving public notice that the agency proposes to request extension of an information collection currently in use. The information collection is NA Form 6045, Volunteer Service Application Form, used by individuals who wish to volunteer at the National Archives Building, the National Archives at College Park, regional records services facilities, and Presidential Libraries.

The public is invited to comment on the proposed information collection pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 23, 2006 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to: Paperwork Reduction Act Comments (NHP), Room 4400, National Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Rd, College Park, MD 20740-6001; or faxed to 301-837-3213; or electronically mailed to *tamee.fechhelm@nara.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Requests for additional information or copies of the proposed information collection and supporting statement should be directed to Tamee Fechhelm at telephone number 301-837-1694, or fax number 301-837-3213. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-13), NARA invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed information collections. The comments and suggestions should address one or more of the following points:

(a)Whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of NARA;

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

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

(d)ways, including the use of information technology, to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents; and

(e)whether small businesses are affected by this collection. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the NARA request for Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. In this notice, NARA is soliciting comments concerning the following information collection: *Title:* Volunteer Service Application. *OMB number:* 3095-0060. *Agency form number:* NA Form 6045. *Type of review:* Regular. *Affected public:* Individuals or households. *Estimated number of respondents:* 2,300. *Estimated time per response:* 25 minutes. *Frequency of response:* On occasion. *Estimated total annual burden hours:* 958 hours. *Abstract:* NARA uses volunteer resources to enhance its services to the public and to further its mission of providing ready access to essential evidence. Volunteers assist in outreach and public programs and provide technical and research support for administrative, archival, library, and curatorial staff. NARA uses a standard way to recruit volunteers and assess the qualifications of potential volunteers. The NA Form 6045, Volunteer Service Application Form, is used by members of the public to signal their interest in being a NARA volunteer and to identify their qualifications for this work. Dated: August 17, 2006. Martha Morphy, Assistant Archivist for Information Services. [FR Doc. E6-13926 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7515-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-259] Tennessee Valley Authority; Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 1; Notice of Withdrawal of Application for Amendment to Facility Operating License The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted the request of the Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee), to withdraw its application for proposed amendment to Facility Operating License No. 50-259 issued to the licensee for operation of the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 1, located in Limestone County, Alabama. The proposed amendment would have revised the Technical Specifications to increase the emergency diesel generator allowed outage time. The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment published in the **Federal Register** on January 18, 2005 (70 FR 2898). However, by letter dated August 4, 2006, the licensee withdrew the proposed change. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated December 6, 2004, as supplemented October 28, 2005, and the licensee's letter dated August 4, 2006, which withdrew the application for license amendment. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html.* Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of August, 2006. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Margaret H. Chernoff, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E6-13940 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE Identification of Countries Under Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974: Request for Public Comment AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Request for written submissions from the public. SUMMARY: Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Trade Act) (19 U.S.C. 2242), requires the United States Trade Representative

(USTR)to identify countries that deny adequate and effective protection of intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection. Section 182 is commonly referred to as the “Special 301” provision of the Trade Act. In addition, USTR is required to determine which of those countries should be identified as Priority Foreign Countries. In its Special 301 Report issued on April 28, 2006, USTR announced the results of the 2006 Special 301 review and stated that Out-of-Cycle Reviews

(OCRs)would be conducted for Indonesia, Canada, Chile, Latvia and Saudi Arabia. USTR requests written comments from the public concerning the acts, policies, and practices relevant for this review under Section 182 of the Trade Act. DATES: Submissions for Indonesia and Chile must be received on or before 5 p.m. on Friday, September 15, 2006. Submissions for Canada, Latvia and Saudi Arabia must be received on or before 5 p.m. on Monday, October 2, 2006. ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to Sybia Harrison, Special Assistant to the Section 301 Committee, and sent

(i)Electronically, to the following e-mail address: *FR0627@ustr.eop.gov,* with “Special 301 Out-of-Cycle Review: Indonesia, Canada, Chile, Latvia and Saudi Arabia” in the subject line, or

(ii)by fax, to

(202)395-9458, with a confirmation copy sent electronically to the e-mail address above. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel S. Bae, Director for Intellectual Property, Office of the United States Trade Representative, at

(202)395-4510. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Section 182 of the Trade Act, USTR must identify those countries that deny adequate and effective protection for intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection. Those countries that have the most onerous or egregious acts, policies, or practices and whose acts, policies, or practices have the greatest adverse impact (actual or potential) on relevant U.S. products may be identified as Priority Foreign Countries. Acts, policies, or practices that are the basis of a country's designation as a Priority Foreign Country are normally the subject of an investigation under the Section 301 provisions of the Trade Act. On April 28, 2006, USTR announced the results of the 2006 Special 301 review, including an announcement that Out-of-Cycle Reviews

(OCRs)would be conducted for Indonesia, Canada, Chile, Latvia and Saudi Arabia. Additional countries may also be reviewed as a result of the comments received pursuant to this notice, or as warranted by events. *Requirements For Comments:* Comments should include a description of the problems experienced, and the effect of the acts, policies, and practices on U.S. industry. Comments should be as detailed as possible and should provide all necessary information for assessing the effect of the acts, policies, and practices. Any comments that include quantitative loss claims should be accompanied by the methodology used in calculating such estimated losses. Comments must be in English. No submissions will be accepted via postal service mail. Documents should be submitted as either WordPerfect, MS Word, or text (.TXT) files. Supporting documentation submitted as spreadsheets is acceptable as Quattro Pro or Excel files. A submitter requesting that information contained in a comment be treated as confidential business information must certify that such information is business confidential and would not customarily be released to the public by the submitter. A non-confidential version of the comment must also be provided. For any document containing business confidential information, 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 “P-” or “BC-” should be followed by the name of the submitter. Submissions should not include separate cover letters; information that might appear in a cover letter should be included in the submission itself. To the extent possible, any attachments to the submission should be included in the same file as the submission itself, and not as separate files. All comments should be addressed to Sybia Harrison, Special Assistant to the Section 301 Committee, and sent

(i)Electronically, to the following e-mail address: *FR0627@ustr.eop.gov,* with “Special 301 Out-of-Cycle Review: Indonesia, Canada, Chile, Latvia and Saudi Arabia” in the subject line, or

(ii)by fax, to

(202)395-9458, with a confirmation copy sent electronically to the e-mail address above. *Public Inspection of Submissions:* Within one business day of receipt, non-confidential submissions will be placed in a public file, open for inspection at the USTR reading room, Office of the United States Trade Representative, Annex Building, 1724 F Street, NW., Room 1, Washington, DC. An appointment to review the file must be scheduled at least 48 hours in advance and may be made by calling Jacqueline Caldwell at

(202)395-6186. The USTR reading room is open to the public from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Victoria Espinel, Assistant USTR for Intellectual Property. [FR Doc. E6-13916 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190-W6-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54327; File No. SR-Amex-2006-47] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 2 Thereto Relating to the Member Firm Guarantee for FLEX Equity Options August 16, 2006. On May 12, 2006, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 to amend Amex Rule 904G(e)(iii) to increase the member firm guarantee for FLEX equity options from 25% to 40%. 3 The Amex filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change on June 5, 2006 and subsequently withdrew Amendment No. 1. The Amex filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change on June 12, 2006. The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on July 12, 2006. 4 The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 A “member firm guarantee” provides, under certain conditions, a member firm with the ability to cross a specified percentage of a customer order with its own proprietary order before specialists and/or registered options traders in the trading crowd can participate in the transaction. 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54104 (July 5, 2006), 71 FR 39374. After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act 5 and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange, 6 and in particular with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act. 7 The Commission notes that under the proposal the member firm guarantee for FLEX equity options could not exceed 40% of an order. The Commission has found with respect to participation guarantees in other contexts that a maximum guarantee of 40% is not inconsistent with statutory standards of competition and free and open markets. 8 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 6 In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 8 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42455 (February 24, 2000), 65 FR 11388 (March 2, 2000). *See also* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51275 (February 28, 2005), 70 FR 10709 (March 4, 2005) (File No. SR-Amex-2005-002). *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 9 that the proposed rule change (SR-Amex-2006-47), as amended, is hereby approved. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 10 10 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13932 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54328; File No. SR-BSE-2006-10] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2 Thereto, To Establish a Fee Per Contract Traded for Improvement Orders Submitted Into a Price Improvement Period by a Public Customer That Are Not Submitted as Customer PIP Orders August 16, 2006. On March 6, 2006, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (“BSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 a proposed rule change to amend the Fee Schedule of the Boston Options Exchange (“BOX”) in the manner described below. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on May 15, 2006. 3 The Commission received one comment letter concerning the proposal. 4 On June 29, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 5 On August 14, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. 6 This order publishes notice of and grants accelerated approval of the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, on an accelerated basis. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53774 (May 9, 2006), 71 FR 28058 (“Notice”). 4 Letter to Nancy Morris, Secretary, Commission, from Adam C. Cooper, Senior Managing Director & General Counsel, Citadel Investment Group, LLC (“Citadel”), dated June 9, 2006 (“Citadel Letter”). 5 In Amendment No. 1, which superseded and replaced the original filing, the Exchange modified its proposal by lowering the proposed BOX fee from $.20 per contract traded to $.15 per contract traded. The Exchange also clarified its reasons for imposing the new fee. 6 In Amendment No. 2, which supersedes and replaces Amendment No. 1 (and the original filing), the Exchange proposes to modify the proposed rule text and clarifies its reasons for imposing the new fee. I. Description of the Proposal Currently, there are two ways Public Customer Orders 7 can be submitted into a Price Improvement Period (“PIP”) auction as an Improvement Order. 8 The first method is the Customer PIP Order (“CPO”), which is an order provided by a Public Customer to her/his BOX Order Flow Provider (“OFP”) that contains a standard limit order price in the standard minimum trading increment—the Book Reference Price 9 —and a limit order placed in a penny increment, the CPO PIP Reference Price. 10 Through a CPO, a Public Customer may participate passively in a PIP auction (should one occur while her/his limit order is at the top of the BOX book) by virtue of the previously submitted instructions given to the OFP, *i.e.* , the CPO PIP Reference Price. 7 The term “Public Customer Order” is defined as “an order for the account of a Public Customer. *See* BOX Rules, Chapter I, Section 1(a)(51). “Public Customer” is defined as “a person that is not a broker or dealer in securities.” *See* BOX Rules Chapter I, Section 1(a)(50). 8 The term “Improvement Orders” is defined in the BOX Rules Chapter V, Section 18(e)(i). 9 The term “Book Reference Price” is defined in BOX Rules Chapter V, Section 18(g)(i). 10 The term “CPO PIP Reference Price” is defined in BOX Rules Chapter V, Section 18(g)(i). Alternatively, a Public Customer may submit an Improvement Order into a PIP auction through an OFP with any instructions that the OFP is willing to accept. 11 These non-CPO Improvement Orders do not have a Book Reference Price and are not exposed on the BOX Book; OFPs submit them on behalf of Public Customers in response to a PIP Broadcast 12 and PIP auction updates. 11 *See* BOX Rules Chapter V, Section 18(e)(i). 12 The PIP broadcast is disseminated once a PIP is initiated and is distributed solely to BOX Options Participants. The broadcasting of this message advises the Options Participants:

(1)That a Primary Improvement Order, as that term is defined in the BOX Rules Chapter V, Section 18(e), has been processed;

(2)of information concerning series, size, price and side of market; and

(3)when the PIP will conclude (“PIP Broadcast”). Originally, the Exchange proposed to amend the BOX Fee Schedule to establish a fee of $.20 per contract traded for Improvement Orders submitted into a PIP by a Public Customer that are not submitted as CPOs. In its letter, which was submitted in response to the original proposed rule change, Citadel urges the Commission to disapprove the proposed rule change because the proposed $.20 per contract traded fee is inconsistent with three provisions of the Act. Citadel argues that the original proposed rule change was inconsistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 13 because it would effect an inequitable allocation of reasonable fees among members and persons using the BOX facilities. Specifically, Citadel stated that the proposed $.20 per contract fee was inequitable because Public Customers would not be afforded a volume discount similar to the one offered to BOX Market Makers 14 who, according to Citadel, enjoy other benefits and privileges that are unavailable to Public Customers. 13 15 U.S.C. 78(b)(4). 14 BOX Market Makers may receive a volume discount of up to $.05 per cotract based upon total volume traded across all assigned classes. *See* Section 3.c. of the Fee Schedule. Citadel also argues that the proposed rule change is inconsistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 15 in that it would discriminate unfairly between Public Customers with access to sophisticated technology and trading techniques (“Options Professionals”) and all other Public Customers (“Investors”) by imposing a fee upon Options Professionals and not Investors. 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Further, Citadel argues that the fee, as originally proposed, would be inconsistent with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act 16 in that it would harm competition. Specifically, Citadel asserts that the proposed rule change would discourage Public Customers from sending non-CPO Improvement Orders to the BOX, which would result in fewer Improvement Orders competing to improve orders submitted to the PIP. Additionally, Citadel predicts that this diminished competition would make it easier for Market Makers to step ahead of Public Customer limit orders posted on the book, which would encourage BOX Participants to internalize more of their order flow, and thereby diminish price discovery and transparency and increase the costs of options investors. 16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8). In response to the Citadel Letter, the Exchange proposes to modify its proposal in Amendment No. 2. In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange proposes to reduce the trading fee applicable to each Improvement Order for a Public Customer not submitted as CPOs from $.20 to $.15. Further, the Exchange proposes to clarify that, under the proposed Fee Schedule as amended, no trading fee would be charged for Public Customer Improvement Orders submitted as CPOs or for Public Customer Orders traded on BOX including marketable orders, which interact with a PIP already underway. II. Discussion After careful consideration of the Citadel Letter and the proposed rule change, as amended in response to the Citadel Letter, the Commission finds that the proposal, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act 17 in general and Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 18 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. 17 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 18 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). To justify this new trading fee on non-CPO Improvement Orders by Public Customers, the Exchange states that these types of orders, like the Improvement Orders of Market Makers and OFPs, are closely monitored for manipulative activity because they are submitted by sophisticated parties, with advanced technology, directly in response to PIP data updates. In contrast, the Exchange characterizes CPOs as more “passive” orders, because they contain preset PIP auction instructions, which pose less of a manipulation risk and therefore draw less regulatory scrutiny. The Exchange states, therefore, that CPOs are less costly to surveil than non-CPO Improvement Orders. In addition, the Exchange states that the high volume of non-CPO Improvement Orders justifies the imposition of the proposed fee. The Exchange states that CPOs, as a result of their passive nature, generate fewer new Improvement Orders than non-CPO Improvement Orders, which are generated by sophisticated trading systems capable of generating many new Improvement Orders during a PIP. Increased Improvement Order traffic requires additional capacity on the BOX trading host, and investment in this additional capacity taxes the Exchange's resources. In light of the increased costs associated with non-CPO Improvement Orders, 19 the proposed fee provides for an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. 19 As discussed below, broker-dealers and Market Makers pay comparable trading fees. *See* Sections 2 and 3 of the Fee Schedule. As mentioned above, in Amendment No. 2, the Exchange proposes to decrease the amount of the proposed fee. Currently, Market Maker and broker-dealer accounts are charged $0.20 per executed contract for Improvement Orders traded in a PIP. As Citadel points out, however, some Market Makers receive volume discounts of up to $0.05 per contract. In response to the Citadel Letter, the Exchange modified its proposal to reduce the proposed trading fee applicable to non-CPO Improvement Orders for Public Customer accounts from $.20 to $.15 per executed contract. 20 As a result, under the amended proposal, the BOX will impose upon Public Customers participating in the PIP through the use of non-CPO Improvement Orders the same transaction fee as a Market Maker receiving the highest volume discount. 20 *See* Amendment No. 2. The Commission also finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act. 21 Section 6(b)(5) of the Act prohibits only “unfair discrimination,” not discrimination *simpliciter.* 22 On its face, the proposed fee discriminates between different means of participating in the PIP auction. 23 However, a CPO and non-CPO Improvement Order impact the BOX differently. A non-CPO Improvement Order, which interacts in the PIP on a dynamic basis, taxes the Exchange's systems capacity and regulatory personnel to a greater degree than do passive CPO participants. In addition, the Book Reference Price associated with a CPO adds liquidity to the displayed BOX Book, which provides value to the BOX because it attracts additional orders. A non-CPO Improvement Order does not provide such liquidity. The Commission believes these differences are a reasonable basis for the Exchange to charge different fees. Discrimination on the basis of the disparate costs to the Exchange of administering the PIP auction is not unfair, particularly given the benefit ( *i.e.* , liquidity) provided to the Exchange by CPOs. 21 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(5). 22 *See Timpinaro* v. *SEC,* 2 F.3d 453, 456 (DC Cir. 1993). 23 The proposed fee would not apply to CPOs submitted by sophisticated Public Customers. Finally, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, 24 which requires that the rules of the Exchange not impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. A $0.15 fee per executed contract, or $0.0015 for each share underlying an option contract, will increase costs to Public Customers submitting non-CPO Improvement Orders by only a *de minimus* amount. Market Makers are charged comparable fees for participating in PIPs. Accordingly, the Commission does not believe this fee will discourage the submission of non-CPO Improvement Orders or impose a burden on competition. 24 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(8). The Commission finds good cause for approving Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change prior to the 30th day after the amendment is published for comment in the **Federal Register** pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act. 25 The proposed rule change, in its original form, was published for comment 26 and, as mentioned above, the Commission received only one comment letter. Amendment No. 2 modifies the substance of the original proposal only by decreasing the amount of the proposed transaction fee from $.20 per contract traded to $.15 per executed contract. 27 This reduction to the proposed fee, which the Exchange offered in response to the Citadel Letter, does not raise any additional regulatory issues. 25 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 26 *See* Notice, *supra* at note 3. 27 In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange also revised the proposed rule text to make explicit that “[t]here are no trading fees for any other Public Customer Orders which may be executed including CPOs and Public Customer orders on the Book.” This new language is consistent with the Exchange's description of the proposed rule change in the original filing: “All other Public Customer Orders traded on BOX, including marketable orders, which interact with a PIP already underway, will continue to be free.” III. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning whether Amendment No. 2 to 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-BSE-2006-10 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BSE-2006-10. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commissions Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BSE-2006-10 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 2006. IV. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 28 that the proposed rule change (SR-BSE-2006-10), as amended, is hereby approved on an accelerated basis. 28 *Id.* For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 29 29 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13931 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54323; File No. SR-CHX-2006-27] Self-Regulatory Organization; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Retroactive Application of Participant Fees and Credits August 16, 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 August 10, 2006, the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (“CHX” 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 CHX. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The CHX proposes to make effective, retroactive to February 9, 2005, the trading permit fee due to the Exchange if a CHX participant's trading permit is cancelled intra-year. 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 CHX included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule changes and discussed any comments it received regarding the proposal. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The CHX 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 Changes 1. Purpose The Exchange proposes to make effective, retroactive to February 9, 2005, a change to the Fee Schedule relating to the trading permit fee due to the Exchange if a CHX participant's trading permit is cancelled intra-year. This change to the Fee Schedule originally became effective on October 24, 2005, 3 and provided that for trading permits cancelled intra-year, the CHX participant shall pay the Exchange the lesser of $2,000 or the remaining balance of the annual trading permit fee. The Exchange believed that it was appropriate to amend the Fee Schedule to provide for some fee relief for CHX participants whose trading permits are cancelled intra-year. However, the Exchange also believed that it was necessary for the Exchange to have an adequate basis on which to budget and project annual revenues. Accordingly, the Exchange instituted the Fee Schedule change that it now seeks to make retroactive. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52815 (November 21, 2005), 70 FR 71572 (November 29, 2005) (SR-CHX-2005-31). The Exchange believed that it had requested retroactive application of the Fee Schedule change at the same time that the change was originally filed with the Commission. 4 It now appears that retroactive application was not requested at that juncture. The Exchange has, however, been reserving funds to be refunded to CHX participants once retroactive application of the Fee Schedule change is approved. The Exchange believes that its participants are entitled to such refunds on account of intra-year trading permit termination. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes retroactive application of the Fee Schedule change, dating back to February 9, 2005. 5 4 *Id.* 5 February 9, 2005 was the date of the Exchange's demutualization, and, correspondingly, the date upon which the Fee Schedule provision relating to trading permit fees first became effective. 2. Statutory Basis The CHX believes the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange and with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. 6 The CHX believes the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 7 in particular in that it provides for an equitable allocation of reasonable fees and other charges among the Exchange's participants. 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will impose any burden on competition. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments Regarding the Proposed Rule Changes 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 Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period

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

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

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

(B)institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposal 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-CHX-2006-27 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-CHX-2006-27. 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 changes 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 CHX. 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-CHX-2006-27 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 2006. 8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 8 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13934 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54321; File No. SR-ISE-2006-46] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Cancellation Fee Changes August 15, 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 August 1, 2006, the International Securities Exchange, Inc. (“ISE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change concerning the Exchange's cancellation fee as described in Items I, II, and II below, which Items have been prepared by the ISE. The ISE has filed the proposed rule change as one establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the ISE under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The ISE proposes to amend its Schedule of Fees regarding its cancellation fee. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Internet Web site ( *http://www.iseoptions.com/legal/proposed_rule_changes.asp* ), at the principal office of the ISE, 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 ISE 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 ISE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of this proposed rule change is to amend the ISE's cancellation fee. The Exchange recently amended its cancellation fee such that the fee is charged to a clearing Electronic Access Member based on the cancellation activity of each of its customers (including itself when it self-clears). 5 Additionally, for purposes of calculating the number of trades, the Exchange now considers all orders executed by the same firm in the same series on the same side of the market at the same price within 30 seconds as only one execution. 6 Despite the adoption of the May Filing, the level of activity in the cancellation of orders remains quite large. The fee currently charged by the Exchange to discourage this activity is insufficient to offset the cost of administering and processing the large number of cancellations on a monthly basis. The Exchange, therefore, proposes to increase its cancellation fee from $1.00 to $1.25. According to the Exchange, this fee increase will enable the ISE to recoup some of the costs of administering and processing cancelled orders. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52177 (July 29, 2005), 70 FR 45457 (August 5, 2005). 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53862 (May 24, 2006), 71 FR 31244 (June 1, 2006) (the “May Filing”). 2. Statutory Basis The basis for the proposed rule change is the requirement under Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 7 that an exchange have an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and other persons using its facilities. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested parties. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change, as amended, establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charged imposed by the Exchange, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 8 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 9 thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change the Commission may summarily abrogate such proposed 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. 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 9 17 CFR 19b-4(f)(2). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-ISE-2006-46 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-ISE-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 the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-ISE-2006-46 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 2006. 10 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 10 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13944 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54325; No. SR-SCCP-2006-01] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Stock Clearing Corporation of Philadelphia; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Value Fees for RIO Accounts and To Remove Reference to Electronic Communications Networks From Its Fee Schedule August 16, 2006. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 notice is hereby given that on July 26, 2006, the Stock Clearing Corporation of Philadelphia (“SCCP”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared primarily by SCCP. SCCP filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 2 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 3 thereunder so that the proposal was effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the rule change from interested parties. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 3 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The purpose of the rule change is to amend the current “Value Fees-Regional Interface Organization (“RIO”) Accounts” 4 from of $0.05 per $1,000 of contract value to $0.0012 per share. 5 SCCP also proposes to update its fee schedule by removing references to Electronic Communications Networks (“ECNs”). 4 See SCCP Rules 1 and 10. 5 The text of the proposed rule change is available at *http://www.phlx.com/sccp/sccp_rules/sr-sccp-2006-01.pdf.* II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, SCCP 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. SCCP has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and

(C)below, of the most significant aspects of these statements. 6 6 The Commission has modified the text of the summaries prepared by SCCP.

(A)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change First, SCCP believes changing the calculation of Value Fees for RIO Accounts from a value-based system to a share-based system should make it easier for a participant organization or a participant to calculate current costs and to estimate future costs associated with these transactions. Second, SCCP is removing reference to ECNs throughout its fee schedule in order to update its fees to more accurately reflect the fees it is currently imposing. Pursuant to previous rule filings, SCCP waived certain fees and charges for SCCP participants for trades executed on the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. for ECNs. Because SCCP did not renew its pilot program of waiving these fees, the waivers are no longer in effect. 7 7 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51153 (February 8, 2005), 70 FR 7786 (February 15, 2005) (SR-SCCP-2005-01). The Commission's temporary approval of SCCP's waiving certain fees associated with ECN trades expired on January 23, 2006. SCCP believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 17A of the Act, 8 as amended, because it clarifies and updates SCCP's fee schedule. As such, it provides for the equitable allocation of fees among its participants and aligns fees for services with the associated cost to deliver the service. 8 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.

(B)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition SCCP does not believe that the proposed rule change would 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 Written comments were not and are not intended to be solicited with respect to the proposed rule change, and none have been received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective upon filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 9 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 10 thereunder because the rule establishes a due, fee, or other charge. At any time within sixty days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ) or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-SCCP-2006-01 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-SCCP-2006-01. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filings also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of SCCP and on SCCP's Web site at *http://www.phlx.com/SCCP/memindex_sccpproposals.html.* 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-SCCP-2006-01 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 2006. For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13933 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54326; File No. SR-CHX-2006-24] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change, and Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto, Regarding Two-Sided Quote Providers August 16, 2006. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on June 27, 2006, the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (“CHX” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. On July 21, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 On August 10, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. 4 The CHX filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 5 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 6 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1 the CHX removed language from its Fee Schedule to reflect that the proposal was effective upon filing, not an earlier date. 4 In Amendment No. 2 the CHX made two non-substantive corrections to the numbering used in the proposed rule text. 5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 6 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend its rules and Schedule of Participant Fees and Credits (”Fee Schedule”) to establish a new role and a new fee credit for participants on the Exchange that qualify as “Two-Sided Quote Providers.” The text of the proposed rule change is set forth below. Proposed new language is *italicized* . ARTICLE IX Trading Rules Two-Sided Quote Providers *RULE 19. a. A Participant may seek to register with the Exchange as a Two-Sided Quote Provider. A “Two-Sided Quote Provider” is required to use its own automated systems to maintain, throughout the Exchange's primary and post-primary trading sessions, a continuous two-sided quote (i.e., a bid and an offer) in all securities that are not traded by an Exchange specialist, but are traded in an automated Exchange system.* *b. The Exchange will provide a credit, as described in the Fee Schedule, to the first three Participants that demonstrate their ability and willingness to serve in this role.* * c. If a Two-Sided Quote Provider does not provide a continuous two-sided quote as required above, the Exchange shall not pay the Two-Sided Quote Provider for the day in which the quotes were not maintained and shall end the Participant's role as a Two-Sided Quote Provider as of the end of the month in which the failure to provide continuous two-sided quotes occurred. * PARTICIPANT FEES AND CREDITS M. Credits 1.-3. No change to text. *4. Through October 31, 2006, total monthly fees owed by a Two-Sided Quote Provider will be reduced (and these participants will be paid each month for any unused credits) by a credit of $3,000 per month.* 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 CHX included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received regarding the proposal. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The CHX 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 Changes 1. Purpose The purpose of the proposed rule change is to allow participant firms to register as “Two-Sided Quote Providers” and to provide a credit of $3,000 per month for firms that fulfill that role. 7 The credit would be available through October 31, 2006. 7 The Exchange originally filed this proposal simply as an addition to its Fee Schedule. *See* SR-CHX-2006-15. The Exchange withdrew that filing concurrently with the submission of the original version of this proposal, which would establish a new rule and a change to the Exchange's Fee Schedule. Under the proposed rule, a Two-Sided Quote Provider would be an Exchange participant that uses its own automated systems to maintain, throughout the Exchange's primary and post-primary trading sessions, a continuous two-sided quote ( *i.e.,* a bid and an offer) in all securities that are not traded by an Exchange specialist, but are traded in an automated Exchange system. 8 If the Two-Sided Quote Provider does not provide a continuous two-sided quote as required above, the Exchange would not pay the Two-Sided Quote Provider for the day in which the quotes were not maintained and would end the participant's role as a Two-Sided Quote Provider as of the end of the month in which the failure occurred. 9 A Two-Sided Quote Provider would continue to be subject to all the CHX rules that apply to its trading on the Exchange, including, but not limited to the firm quote rule, the electronic book's clearly erroneous rule, the rules prohibiting trading ahead of customer orders and the Intermarket Trading System (“ITS”) rules. 10 8 The Exchange plans to provide the $3,000 credit, on a first-come, first-served basis, to the first three participants that demonstrate their ability and willingness to serve in this role. The Exchange does not believe that these firms would need to register as market makers in the Exchange's electronic book (where many securities that are not traded by a specialist are traded) or on the Exchange (where some listed securities have not yet been transitioned to trading in the electronic book), because the Exchange does not seek to impose any requirement that these firms maintain fair and orderly markets. 9 The Exchange also would consider a failure to provide these quotes as a violation of the Exchange's rules. The Exchange could exercise its discretion in determining whether or not to pursue a further fine or penalty from a participant for a violation of this rule based on applicable facts and circumstances. 10 Registration as a Two-Sided Quote Provider does not allow a participant to avoid the application of any CHX trading rule that would otherwise apply to its activities as a CHX floor broker, market maker, specialist or order-sending firm. According to the Exchange, its proposal is designed to provide an appropriate incentive to up to three participant firms to ensure that a two-sided quote is continuously displayed on the Exchange in securities that are traded on the Exchange. 11 11 Under the current Intermarket Trading System Plan (“ITS Plan ”), a member in any market that is an ITS Plan participant may use the ITS System to trade a particular security only if the market maintains continuous two-sided quotations in that security. *See* ITS Plan, Section 6(a)(i). This proposed credit would help ensure, among other things, that a continuous two-sided quote is displayed on the Exchange in all securities that qualify for trading under the ITS Plan. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular, with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. 12 In particular, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 13 because it would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, protect investors and the public interest by permitting the Exchange to allow its participants to register as Two-Sided Quote Providers to help ensure, among other things, that a continuous two-sided quote is displayed on the Exchange in all securities that qualify for trading under the ITS Plan. 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments Regarding the Proposed Rule Changes Received From Members, Participants or Others The CHX has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Changes and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change:

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

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

(3)by its terms does not become operative for 30-days after the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 14 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 15 14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 15 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), the CHX provided the Commission with written notice of its intention to file the proposed rule change at least 5 business days prior to filing the proposal with the Commission. A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 16 normally does not become operative prior to 30-days after the date of filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The CHX has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay. 16 *Id.* The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, because it may ensure that a continuous two-sided quote is displayed on the Exchange in securities that are traded on the Exchange. 17 Furthermore, the Commission notes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is similar to Pacific Exchange Rule 7.58, Compliance with Two-Sided Quote Requirement in ITS Plan, which provides that the Archipelago Securities, LLC is responsible for entering two-sided orders in all stocks eligible for trading on the NYSE Arca Marketplace for purposes of fulfilling the two-sided quote requirement found in Section 6(a)(i)(B) of the ITS Plan. Accordingly, the Commission designates the proposed rule change, as amended, as effective and operative immediately upon filing with the Commission. 17 For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60-days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 18 18 For purposes of calculating the 60-day 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 August 10, 2006, the date on which the CHX submitted Amendment No. 2. *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 proposal, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-CHX-2006-24 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-CHX-2006-24. 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 CHX. 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-CHX-2006-24 and should be submitted on or before September 13, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 19 19 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13943 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary [Order 2006-7-3; Docket OST-2006-25307] Notice of Order Extending Comment Period for Show-Cause; International Air Transport Association Tariff Conference Proceeding AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation. SUMMARY: The Department has directed all interested persons to show cause why it should not issue an order withdrawing its approval under 49 U.S.C. 41309 for an International Air Transport Association (“IATA”) agreement, the Provisions for the Conduct of the IATA Traffic Conferences, insofar as that agreement establishes tariff conferences whereby IATA's member carriers discuss and agree upon passenger fares and cargo rates for U.S.-Australia/Europe markets. The Department is extending the due date for comments on that order from August 21 to October 20, 2006. Replies will be due November 20, 2006. DATES: Objections must be submitted on or before October 20. Answers to objections must be filed by November 20, 2006. ADDRESSES: Objections and answers to objections must be filed in Docket number OST-2006-25307 by one of the following means:

(1)By mail to the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001.

(2)By hand delivery to room PL-401 on the Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.

(3)Electronically through the Webs site for the Docket Management System at *http://www.dms.dot.gov.* Comments must be filed in Docket OST-2006-25307. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Kiser, Pricing & Multilateral Affairs Division (X-43, Room 6424), U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh St. SW., Washington, DC 20590,

(202)366-2435; or Thomas Ray, Office of the General Counsel (C-30, Room 4102), U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh St. SW., Washington, DC 20590,

(202)366-4731. Dated: August 16, 2006. Michael W. Reynolds, Acting Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs. [FR Doc. E6-13958 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Sunshine Act Meetings; Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors Pursuant to the Government in the Sunshine Act (Pub. L. 94-409) (5 U.S.C. 552b). AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. Times and Dates: August 22, 2006, 1 p.m. to 5 p.m., and August 23, 2006, 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. Place: Hilton Chicago O'Hare Airport, O'Hare International Airport, Chicago, IL 60666. Status: Open to the public. Matters to be Considered: An overview of the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement requirements set forth under section 4305 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, August 10, 2005); and the administrative functioning of the Board. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. William Quade,

(202)366-2172, Director, Office of Safety Programs, FMCSA, or Mr. Bryan Price,

(412)395-4816, Transportation Specialist, FMCSA Pennsylvania Division Office, office hours are from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t. Monday through Friday except Federal holidays. Dated: August 21, 2006. Pamela Pelcovits, Director, Office of Policy, Plans, and Regulation. [FR Doc. 06-7125 Filed 8-21-06; 12:57 pm]

Connectionstraces to 9

Traces to 9 documents

U.S. Code