Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2006-09-27 · SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION · Notices

Notices. Notice of final action regarding amendments to Federal sentencing guidelines effective November 1, 2006; correction

13,041 words·~59 min read·/register/2006/09/27/06-8335

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

BILLING CODE 7590-01-M SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54476; File No. SR-BSE-2006-31] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Removing Its Short Sale Price Test Rule September 20, 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 September 6, 2006, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.
(“BSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. BSE has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a “non-controversial” rule change under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 under the Act, 3 which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change BSE proposes amending its rules related to trading in Nasdaq securities to remove the short sale price test rule, or “bid test” rule, applicable to Nasdaq Global Market securities and Nasdaq Capital Market securities (“Nasdaq Securities”) traded on facilities of the BSE. That rule is presently set forth in Chapter XXXV, Section 26 of the BSE Rules. In addition to removing the BSE “bid test” rule for short sales of Nasdaq Securities from the BSE Rules, the proposed amendment is intended to clarify that all Nasdaq Securities traded on BSE facilities will be exempt from the requirements of any short sale price test applicable to Nasdaq Securities, including, but not limited to, the short sale price test set forth in Rule 10a-1 of the Act.
Regulation SHO Rule 202T established procedures to allow the Commission to temporarily suspend short sale price tests so that the Commission could study the effectiveness of short sale price tests (the “Pilot”). 4 The Pilot is designed to assist the Commission in assessing whether changes to short sale regulation are necessary in light of current market practices and the purposes underlying short sale regulation. To determine whether additional rulemaking is necessary, Commission staff will evaluate the results of the Pilot.
After completion of the Pilot Program or at such other time if the Commission determines that such exemptions are no longer necessary or appropriate in the public interest or consistent with the protection of investors, the BSE will amend its rules accordingly, if necessary. The text of the proposed rule change is available from the principal office of the Exchange and from the Commission's Public Reference Room. 4 *See* Exchange Act Release No. 50104 (July 28, 2004), 69 FR 48032 (August 6, 2004).
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 self-regulatory organization 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 self-regulatory organization has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose On or about August 1, 2006, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”) became a national securities exchange. As a result of Nasdaq becoming a national securities exchange, Nasdaq Securities became exchange listed securities subject to the short sale “tick test” provisions of Rule 10a-1 under the Act, which governs short sales of any security registered on, or admitted to, unlisted trading privileges on a national securities exchange if such transactions are made pursuant to an effective transaction reporting plan as defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS. 5 5 *See* the July 20, 2006 letter from James Brigagliano, Acting Associate Director, Securities and Exchange Commission, Division of Market Regulation to David C.
Whitcomb, Jr., at the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. Both the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. and Nasdaq requested, and have been granted, an exemption from the “tick test” provisions of Rule 10a-1 for Nasdaq listed securities while the Regulation SHO Pilot Program (the “Pilot Program”) remains pending or until such other time as the Commission determines that such exemptions are no longer necessary or appropriate in the public interest or consistent with the protection of investors. 6 The BSE intends to rely upon the exemption from the “tick test” provisions of Rule 10a-1 set forth in the Commission's July 20, 2006 letter to the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.
As such, transactions in Nasdaq Securities on the BSE will be exempt from the “tick test” provisions of Rule 10a-1 just as transactions in Nasdaq Securities on the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. are exempt. The BSE will not apply a “tick test” for Nasdaq Securities until the Pilot Program is completed or the Commission directs otherwise. 6 *See id.* Even though the BSE will not be applying the “tick test” to Nasdaq Securities traded on the BSE, the BSE does have a short sale price test rule that requires Nasdaq Securities traded by specialists be subject to a “bid test.” 7 The BSE “bid test” rule is presently set forth in Chapter XXXV, Section 26 of the BSE Rules and states, in relevant part, that “No specialist shall effect a short sale for the account of a customer or for his own account in a Nasdaq security at or below the current best (inside) bid when the current best (inside) bid is below the preceding best (inside) bid in the security.
” This proposed amendment is intended to remove the short sale “bid test” rule applicable to Nasdaq Securities traded by specialists on the BSE. This proposed amendment would allow short sales of Nasdaq Securities traded by specialists on the BSE without a short sale price test rule until December 31, 2006, after which the BSE will be trading Nasdaq Securities solely on its fully electronic Boston Equities Exchange (“BeX”). As of January 1, 2007 there will no longer be any specialist traded stocks on the BSE or any of its facilities.
As such, BeX traded securities are not subject to Chapter XXXV, Section 26 of the BSE Rules because they are not traded by specialists. 7 Prior to Nasdaq becoming a national securities, NASD's short sale “bid test” Rule 3350, now Rule 5100, was not applicable to a National Securities Exchange trading Nasdaq securities on an unlisted trading privileges basis. Therefore there was no requirement for the BSE to have a short sale “bid test” rule for Nasdaq securities. The BSE has not traded a Nasdaq security on the Exchange since or about September of 2004.
BSE began receiving nominal specialist-traded Nasdaq crossing business in August 2006. In August, BSE received one cross transaction. BSE expects that the specialist-traded Nasdaq crossing business, which will conclude when BSE begins trading Nasdaq securities on the fully electronic BeX on January 1, 2007, will continue to be a nominal amount in overall Nasdaq security trading volume and should not have any material effect on the Pilot. The BSE believes if it did not remove its current short sale “bid test” rule it would be at a competitive disadvantage to other regional market centers. 2.
Basis BSE states that the proposed amendment is designed to prevent the BSE from being at a competitive disadvantage to other regional market centers that may be able to attract order flow as a result of their not having any short sale price test applicable to Nasdaq Securities until completion of the Pilot Program or until such other time as the Commission determines that such exemptions are no longer necessary or appropriate in the public interest or consistent with the protection of investors.
Except for some nominal Nasdaq crossing business that began in August 2006 and will conclude on January 1, 2007, BSE has not traded Nasdaq securities since September 2004. In addition, the proposed amendment will delete a rule that will be rendered obsolete on January 1, 2007, when BSE begins trading Nasdaq securities on the BeX on a fully electronic basis without specialists. As such, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act, 8 in general, and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 9 in particular, in that it is designed to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transaction in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism for a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action
(a)This proposed rule change is filed pursuant to paragraph
(A)of section 19(b)(3) of the Act.
(b)Because the foregoing rule change does not:
(i)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and
(iii)become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 10 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 11 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form *http://www.sec.gov/rules.sro.shtml;* or • Send an e-mail to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include File Number SR-BSE-2006-31 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-BSE-2006-31. 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 at the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the above-mentioned self-regulatory organization. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to the File Number SR-BSE-2006-31 and should be submitted on or before October 18, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-15793 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [(Release No. 34-54475; File No. SR-CBOE-2005-103)] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Amend CBOE Rules Relating to the Electronic Designated Primary Market Maker Program September 20, 2006. I. Introduction On December 5, 2005, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” 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 CBOE rules relating to the Electronic Designated Primary Market Maker Program (“e-DPM Program”). On August 11, 2006, CBOE amended the proposed rule change. 3 The proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on August 18, 2006. 4 The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change, as amended. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 Amendment No. 1 replaced and superseded the original proposal in its entirety. 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54311 (August 11, 2006), 71 FR 47834. II. Description of the Proposal The Exchange's e-DPM Program allows e-DPMs to operate remotely as competing DPMs by entering bids and offers electronically from locations other than the trading floor. Exchange rules provide that the Exchange will determine which option classes to include in the e-DPM Program and, accordingly, which classes to allocate to each respective e-DPM. The proposed rule change would give the Exchange the corresponding authority to remove any e-DPM option class from the e-DPM Program if certain factors no longer warranted the continued inclusion of that option class in the e-DPM Program. The factors used in making this determination would relate to the option class itself and would include only the following:
(i)Market share;
(ii)number of exchanges trading the product;
(iii)average daily trading volume; and
(iv)liquidity in the product. The Exchange would consider any one or all of these factors in determining whether to remove an option class from the e-DPM Program. Persons who are aggrieved by the removal of an option class from the e-DPM Program would be permitted to appeal the decision in accordance with the Exchange's standard procedures on review of Exchange actions, as set forth in Chapter XIX of the Exchange's rules. III. Discussion After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 5 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 6 in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market. The Commission also finds that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(7) of the Act, 7 in that it provides a fair procedure for the limitation by the Exchange of any person with respect to access to services offered by the Exchange. 5 In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission has considered its impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(7). The proposed rule change permits the Exchange to remove option classes from the e-DPM Program only if certain factors no longer warrant the continued inclusion of that class in the program. The Commission notes that the factors to be considered by the Exchange ( *i.e.* , market share, number of exchanges trading the product, trading volume, and liquidity) are objective and would limit the Exchange's ability to act in this area. The proposed factors to be considered by the Exchange in determining whether to remove an option class from the e-DPM Program, coupled with the right to appeal the Exchange's determination, should help to protect persons from an unfair limitation of access to services offered by the Exchange, while permitting the Exchange to further the competitive goals of the e-DPM Program. Accordingly, the Commission believes that the amended proposal is consistent with the Act. IV. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 8 that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2005-103), as amended, be, and it hereby is, approved. 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 9 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 9 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-15794 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54477; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-034] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Practice of Using a Fifth Character Identifier With the Symbol of Foreign Securities September 20, 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 28, 2006, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by Nasdaq. Nasdaq filed the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) 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). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Nasdaq is filing with the Commission a proposed rule change to clarify the non-applicability of the record-keeping fee in Nasdaq Rule 4510(e) and Nasdaq Rule 4520(d) when a non-U.S. issuer requests to eliminate the fifth character identifier affixed to the symbol of its securities. 5 5 This proposal does not require changes to Nasdaq's rule text. Telephone conversation between Jonathan F. Cayne, Associate General Counsel, The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc., and Nataliya Cowen, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, on September 19, 2006. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, Nasdaq included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. Nasdaq has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Prior to 1999, Nasdaq required an “F” or “Y” be affixed to the symbol of all non-U.S. securities and American Depositary Receipts that traded on the Nasdaq Stock Market. In 1999, Nasdaq ceased this practice for new listings and allowed existing non-U.S. listed companies to remove the fifth character identifier upon request. 6 For those non-U.S. issuers that have not so requested, Nasdaq continues to include the fifth character identifier on the symbol of their securities. Nasdaq is making this filing to clarify that the record-keeping fee in Rule 4510(e) and Rule 4520(d) is not applicable to a non-U.S. issuer that requests that Nasdaq eliminate the fifth character identifier. 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 41076 (Feb. 19, 1999); 64 FR 9552 (Feb. 26, 1999). The $2,500 record-keeping fee set forth in Nasdaq Rule 4510(e) and Nasdaq Rule 4520(d) is used to address the costs associated with revising Nasdaq's records when issuers engage in certain actions, including a voluntary change in trading symbol. However, Nasdaq notes that these non-U.S. issuers did not choose to have the fifth character identifier, as before 1999 it was mandatory. Further, these issuers are not requesting any change to their “root” four letter symbol. Accordingly, Nasdaq believes that these changes should not be treated as a voluntary symbol change and, therefore, it is inappropriate to charge the $2,500 record-keeping fee when a non-U.S. issuer drops the fifth character identifier. 2. Statutory Basis Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 7 in general and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) 8 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system, and in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition 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 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 has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 9 and subparagraph (f)(1) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder 10 in that it constitutes a stated policy, practice or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule. As such, this proposed rule change is effective upon filing. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-034 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-034. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal offices of Nasdaq. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-034 and should be submitted on or before October 18, 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. E6-15799 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54479; File No. SR-NASD-2006-108] Self-Regulatory Organizations: National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to a New NASD Trade Reporting Facility Established in Conjunction With the National Stock Exchange September 21, 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 September 14, 2006, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by NASD. 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 NASD is proposing to adopt rules relating to a new Trade Reporting Facility (the “NASD/NSX TRF”) to be established by NASD, in conjunction with the National Stock Exchange (“NSX”), that would provide members another mechanism for reporting trades in Nasdaq-listed equity securities effected otherwise than on an exchange. The proposed NASD/NSX TRF structure and rules are substantially similar to the Trade Reporting Facility (“TRF”) established by NASD and Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (the “NASD/Nasdaq TRF”) and rules relating thereto, which were approved by the Commission pursuant to proposed rule change SR-NASD-2005-087. 3 Pursuant to the proposed rule change, NASD is also proposing:
(1)Amendments to certain NASD rules to reflect the operation of more than one Trade Reporting Facility established by NASD; and
(2)new NASD Rule 5140 relating to the use of multiple Market Participant Symbols by members reporting trades to a Trade Reporting Facility established by NASD. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54084 (June 30, 2006), 71 FR 38935 (July 10, 2006) (SR-NASD-2005-087) (“Approval Order”). SR-NASD-2005-087 became effective upon the date on which The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (the “Nasdaq Exchange”) commenced operation as a national securities exchange for Nasdaq-listed securities, which was August 1, 2006. The text of the proposed rule change is available on NASD's Web site at ( *http://www.nasd.com* ), at the principal office of the NASD, at the Commission's Public Reference Room, and the Commission's Web site at ( *http://www.sec.gov* ). II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, NASD included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. NASD has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose On June 30, 2006, the Commission approved SR-NASD-2005-087. 4 Among other things, the Approval Order proposed:
(1)Amendments to the NASD Delegation Plan, NASD By-Laws and NASD rules to reflect a proposed phased implementation strategy for the operation of the Nasdaq Exchange as a national securities exchange with respect to Nasdaq-listed securities during a transitional period; and
(2)rules for reporting trades effected otherwise than on an exchange to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF. Pursuant to SR-NASD-2005-087, NASD proposed the NASD Rule 4000 Series (The Trade Reporting Facility) and the NASD Rule 6100 Series (Clearing and Comparison Rules), which generally apply to trade reporting and clearing and comparison services via the NASD/Nasdaq TRF. 4 *Id.* NASD/NSX Trade Reporting Facility The NASD proposes to establish a new NASD/NSX TRF on substantially the same terms as the NASD/Nasdaq TRF. 5 The NASD/NSX TRF will provide members another mechanism, which has been developed by NSX, for reporting transactions in Nasdaq-listed equity securities executed otherwise than on an exchange. 6 Members will match and/or execute orders internally or through proprietary systems and submit these trades to the NASD/NSX TRF with the appropriate information and modifiers. The NASD/NSX TRF will report the trades to the appropriate exclusive securities information processor (“SIP”). 7 As with trades reported to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF, NASD/NSX TRF transactions disseminated to the media will include a modifier indicating the source of such transactions that would distinguish them from transactions executed on or through the NSX. In addition, the NASD/NSX TRF will provide NASD with a real-time copy of each trade report for regulatory review purposes. At the option of the participant, the NASD/NSX TRF may also provide the necessary clearing information regarding transactions to the National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”). 5 In response to comments submitted to the Commission in connection with the Approval Order, NASD indicated that it was prepared to implement a TRF with any exchange based on whatever technology the exchange has available to it. *See* Letter to Honorable Christopher Cox, Chairman, Commission, dated May 2, 2006 from Robert Glauber, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, NASD. As the Commission noted in its Approval Order, the Act does not prohibit NASD from establishing different facilities for purposes of fulfilling its regulatory obligations. *See* Approval Order. 6 NASD will submit a second proposed rule change relating to reporting to the NASD/NSX TRF of transactions in all exchange-listed securities executed otherwise than on an exchange. 7 The NASD/NSX TRF will have controls in place to ensure that transactions that are reported to the NASD/NSX TRF, but are priced significantly away from the current market, will not be submitted to the SIP. This is consistent with current practice, which is designed to preserve the integrity of the tape; today, such trades are not submitted to the SIP by the ADF or the NASD/Nasdaq TRF. Like the NASD/Nasdaq TRF, the NASD/NSX TRF will be a facility of NASD, subject to regulation by NASD and NASD's registration as a national securities association. It will not be a service “for the purpose of effecting or reporting a transaction” on the NSX; rather, it will be a service for the purpose of reporting over-the-counter transactions in Nasdaq-listed equity securities to NASD. 8 Thus, members that meet all applicable requirements will now have the option of reporting transactions in Nasdaq-listed equity securities executed otherwise than on an exchange to the NASD/NSX TRF, NASD's Alternative Display Facility (“ADF”) or the NASD/Nasdaq TRF. 9 8 See Approval Order. 9 NASD will have an integrated audit trail of NASD/Nasdaq TRF, NASD/NSX TRF and ADF transactions and will have integrated surveillance capabilities. NASD expects that comprehensive audit trail and surveillance integration on an automated basis will be completed by the end of the fourth quarter of 2006. Prior to that time, NASD staff will be able to create an integrated audit trail on a manual basis as needed for regulatory purposes. NSX has developed the system that participants will use to access the NASD/NSX TRF. Technical Specifications to connect to the NASD/NSX TRF system are available upon request to NASD and will be accessible through the NASD's Web site at a later date. NASD/NSX TRF Limited Liability Company Agreement NASD and NSX propose to enter into a Limited Liability Company Agreement of NASD/NSX Trade Reporting Facility LLC (“the NASD/NSX LLC Agreement”). The terms of the NASD/NSX LLC Agreement are substantially similar to the terms of the LLC agreement that NASD entered with Nasdaq Stock Market Inc. (“Nasdaq”). NASD will have sole regulatory responsibility for the NASD/NSX TRF, while NSX agrees to pay the cost of regulation and will provide systems to enable members to report trades to the NASD/NSX TRF. NSX will be entitled to the profits and losses, if any, derived from the operation of the NASD/NSX TRF. NASD, the SRO Member under the NASD/NSX LLC Agreement, will perform SRO Responsibilities including, but not limited to:
(1)Adoption, amendment and interpretation of policies arising out of and regarding any aspect of the operation of the facility considered material by the SRO Member, or regarding the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of the SRO Member, including any generally applicable exemption from such a rule;
(2)Approval of rule filings of the SRO Member prior to filing with the Commission;
(3)Regulation of the NASD/NSX TRF's activities of or relating to SRO Responsibilities, including the right to review and approve, in the SRO Member's sole reasonable discretion, the regulatory budget for the NASD/NSX TRF;
(4)Securities regulation and any other matter implicating SRO Responsibilities; and
(5)Real-time market surveillance. 10 10 The SRO Member will perform real-time market surveillance related to trades reported to the NASD/NSX TRF. However, because the NASD/NSX TRF via the Business Member will submit transaction information directly to the SIP, the NASD/NSX TRF via the Business Member also will establish and implement controls to ensure that transactions that are reported to the NASD/NSX TRF, but are priced significantly away from the current market, will not be submitted to the SIP. *See supra* note 7. NSX, the “Business Member” under the NASD/NSX LLC Agreement, will be primarily responsible for the management of the facility's business affairs to the extent those activities are not inconsistent with the regulatory and oversight functions of NASD. Under Section 9(d) of the NASD/NSX LLC Agreement, each Member agrees to comply with the Federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder and to cooperate with the Commission pursuant to its regulatory authority and the provisions of the NASD/NSX LLC Agreement. The NASD/NSX TRF will be managed by or under the direction of a Board of Directors to be established by the parties. NASD will have the right to designate at least one Director, the SRO Member Director, who may be a member of NASD's Board of Governors or an officer or employee of NASD designated by the NASD Board of Governors. The SRO Member Director will have veto power over all major actions of the NASD/NSX LLC Board. Major Actions are defined in Section 10(e) of the NASD/NSX LLC Agreement to include:
(1)Approving pricing decisions that are subject to the SEC filing process;
(2)Approving contracts between the NASD/NSX TRF and the Business Member, any of its affiliates, directors, officers or employees;
(3)Approving Director compensation;
(4)Selling, licensing, leasing or otherwise transferring material assets used in the operation of the NASD/NSX TRF's business outside of the ordinary course of business with an aggregate value in excess of $3 million;
(5)Approving or undertaking a merger, consolidation or reorganization of the NASD/NSX TRF with any other entity;
(6)Entering into any partnership, joint venture or other similar joint business undertaking;
(7)Making any fundamental change in the market structure of the NASD/NSX TRF from that contemplated by the Members as of the date of the NASD/NSX LLC Agreement;
(8)To the fullest extent permitted by law, taking any action to effect the voluntary, or which would precipitate an involuntary, dissolution or winding up of the Company, other than as contemplated by Section 21 of the NASD/NSX LLC Agreement;
(9)Conversion of the NASD/NSX TRF from a Delaware limited liability company into any other type of entity;
(10)Expansion of or modification to the business which results in the NASD/NSX TRF engaging in material business unrelated to the business of Non-System Trading; 11 11 Pursuant to the NASD/NSX LLC Agreement, “Non-System Trading” means trading otherwise than on an exchange of securities for which the SEC has approved a transaction reporting plan pursuant to Rule 601 of Regulation NMS under the Act.
(11)Changing the number of Directors on or composition of the Board; and
(12)Adopting or amending policies regarding access and credit matters affecting the NASD/NSX TRF. In addition, each Director agrees to comply with the Federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder and to cooperate with the Commission and the SRO Member pursuant to their regulatory authority. The principal difference between the NASD/NSX LLC Agreement and the LLC Agreement NASD entered with Nasdaq relates to termination. The initial term of the agreement is three years. During that time, until the NASD/NSX TRF reaches “Substantial Trade Volume” (defined as 250,000 trades or more per day for three consecutive months), NSX may terminate the arrangement for convenience. After the NASD/NSX TRF reaches Substantial Trade Volume, either Member may terminate NASD/NSX Trade Reporting Facility LLC by providing to the other Member prior written notice of at least one year (as in the case with Nasdaq). Neither Member may deliver such notice before the second anniversary of the effective date of the NASD/NSX LLC Agreement. In addition, at any time, NASD may terminate in the event its status or reputation as a preeminent SRO is called into jeopardy by the actions of NSX or the NASD/NSX TRF. In the event of termination of the NASD/NSX TRF arrangement, NASD will be able to fulfill all of its regulatory obligations with respect to over-the-counter trade reporting through its other facilities, including the NASD/Nasdaq TRF and ADF. NASD/NSX Trade Reporting Facility Rules Members will report trades in Nasdaq-listed equity securities effected otherwise than on an exchange to the NASD/NSX TRF pursuant to NASD rules. As such, NASD is proposing rules relating to the use and operation of the NASD/NSX TRF that are substantially similar to the rules approved by the Commission relating to the NASD/ Nasdaq TRF. 12 Specifically, NASD is proposing the new NASD Rule 4000C and NASD Rule 6100C Series, which track the NASD Rule 4000 and NASD Rule 6100 Series adopted pursuant to the Approval Order. 12 *See* Approval Order. Similar to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF rules, to become a participant in the NASD/NSX TRF, an NASD member must meet minimum requirements as outlined in NASD Rule 6120C. These include execution of, and continuing compliance with, a Participant Application Agreement; membership in, or maintenance of an effective clearing arrangement with a participant of a clearing agency registered pursuant to the Act; and the acceptance and settlement of each trade that the NASD/NSX TRF identifies as having been effected by the participant. Members that report trades to the NASD/NSX TRF must include the details of the trade, as required by the proposed rules. Participants must also include the unique order identifier assigned for purposes of reporting to the Order Audit Trail System, thus enabling NASD to match the order against the trade that was reported to the tape by the NASD/NSX TRF. As with the NASD/Nasdaq TRF, participants may enter into “give-up” arrangements whereby one member reports to the NASD/NSX TRF on behalf of another member. Participants must complete and submit to the NASD/NSX TRF the appropriate documentation reflecting the arrangement. Proposed NASD Rule 4632C(g) provides that the member with the reporting obligation remains responsible for the transaction submitted on its behalf. Further, both the member with the reporting obligation and the member submitting the trade to the NASD/NSX TRF are responsible for ensuring that the information submitted is in compliance with all applicable rules and regulations. 13 13 As noted above, NASD/Nasdaq TRF participants may enter into “give-up” arrangements; however, the NASD/Nasdaq TRF rules currently do not contain a provision similar to proposed NASD Rule 4632C(g). NASD has submitted a proposed rule change to amend the NASD/Nasdaq TRF rules to include a provision that is identical to proposed NASD Rule 4632C(g). *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54451 (September 15, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-104) (Notice). In addition, participants will be able to submit “riskless principal” transactions 14 to the NASD/NSX TRF. Similar to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF, the non-media portion of a riskless principal transaction will not be reported to the tape, but will be submitted real-time to NASD for regulatory purposes and, at the option of the user, to NSCC. Proposed NASD Rule 4632C(d)(3)(B) 15 would clarify that where the media leg of the riskless principal transaction is reported to the NASD/NSX TRF, the second, non-media leg must also be reported to the NASD/NSX TRF. However, where the media leg of the riskless principal transaction was previously reported by an exchange, the member would be permitted, but not required, to report the second, non-media leg to the NASD/NSX TRF. Members that choose to report such transactions to the NASD/NSX TRF must include all data elements required under the rules. Members should note, however, that transactions reported by an exchange should not be reported to NASD/NSX TRF for media purposes, as that would result in double reporting of the same transaction. 16 14 A riskless principal transaction is a transaction in which a member, after having received a customer order, executes an offsetting transaction, as principal, with another customer or broker-dealer to fill that customer order and both transactions are executed at the same price. 15 Proposed NASD Rule 4632C(d)(3)(B) mirrors recently proposed amendments to NASD Rule 4632(d)(3)(B) of the NASD/Nasdaq TRF rules. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54451 (September 15, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-104) (Notice). 16 Proposed NASD Rule 4632C(e)(6) provides that transactions reported on or through an exchange shall not be reported to the NASD/NSX TRF for purposes of publication. This proposed rule mirrors NASD Rule 4632(e)(6) of the NASD/Nasdaq TRF rules. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 54084 (June 30, 2006), 71 FR 38935 (July 10, 2006) (File No. SR-NASD-2005-087); 53977 (June 12, 2006), 71 FR 34976 (June 16, 2006) (File No. SR-NASD-2006-055); and 54318 (August 15, 2006), 71 FR 48959 (August 22, 2006) (File No. SR-NASD-2006-098). Finally, NASD will have the authority to halt trading otherwise than on an exchange reported to the NASD/NSX TRF. The scope of NASD's authority under proposed NASD Rule 4633C is identical to its authority to halt trading reported to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF and the ADF. As described below, the proposed rules differ from the NASD/Nasdaq TRF rules in certain respects. Currently, NASD Rules 4100 and 4200(a)(2) of the NASD/Nasdaq TRF rules define “designated securities” as all Nasdaq National Market (now Nasdaq Global Market) and Nasdaq Capital Market securities and convertible bonds listed on Nasdaq. 17 As defined in proposed NASD Rules 4100C and 4200C(a)(2), “designated securities” for purposes of reporting trades to the NASD/NSX TRF means “all equity securities listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC.” The proposed definition is intended to capture the same universe of Nasdaq-listed securities (except for convertible bonds) in current NASD Rules 4100 and 4200(a)(2), without specifying the various Nasdaq tiers. 17 On September 5, 2006, NASD filed a proposed rule change that proposes, among other things, to amend the definition of “designated securities” in NASD Rules 4100 and 4200(a)(2) to apply to all NMS stocks as defined in NASD Rule 600(b)(47) of Regulation NMS under the Act. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54451 (September 15, 2006) (SR-NASD-2006-104) (Notice). NASD intends to propose a similar amendment to the definition of “designated securities” in proposed NASD Rules 4100C and 4200C(a)(2) in a separate rule filing. Second, pursuant to proposed NASD Rule 6120C, only members of NASD may use the NASD/NSX TRF. Non-members will not be permitted to submit trade reports to the NASD/NSX TRF. Under very limited circumstances, certain Non-Member Clearing Organizations are granted access to and participation in the NASD/Nasdaq TRF. Third, pursuant to proposed NASD Rule 6140C, all trades submitted to the NASD/NSX TRF must be locked-in prior to entry into the System. The NASD/NSX TRF will have no trade comparison functionality. Thus, there are no proposed rules relating to trade matching, trade acceptance or aggregate volume matching. Similarly, there will be no “Browse” function, meaning that participants will not be able to review or query for trades in the NASD/NSX TRF identifying the participant as a party to the transaction. Fourth, on the first day of operation, the NASD/NSX TRF will not be able to support trade reporting for certain transactions. Specifically, transactions executed outside of normal market hours cannot be reported to the NASD/NSX TRF on an “as/of” or next day (T+1) basis, pursuant to NASD Rule 4632C(a)(2). In addition, the NASD/NSX TRF will not support the .W or .PRP modifiers and therefore proposed NASD Rule 4632C(a)(7) provides that Stop Stock Transactions (as such term is defined in NASD Rule 4200C), transactions at prices based on average-weighting or other special pricing formulae, and transactions that reflect a price different from the current market when the execution price is based on a prior reference point in time cannot be reported to the NASD/NSX TRF. Thus, proposed NASD Rules 4632C(a)(2) and
(7)expressly require members to report such trades to NASD via an alternative electronic mechanism. 18 18 The NASD/NSX TRF is intended to ultimately have much of the same functionality that will be provided by the NASD/Nasdaq TRF. When and if such functionality is developed, NASD will file a proposed rule change to amend the NASD/NSX TRF trade reporting rules accordingly. Similarly, proposed NASD Rule 4632C(a)(3) provides that participants must use an alternative electronic mechanism, and comply with all rules applicable to such alternative mechanism, to report transactions to NASD for which electronic submission to the NASD/NSX TRF is not possible. Where last sale reports of transactions in designated securities cannot be submitted to NASD via an alternative electronic mechanism such as the ADF or another Trade Reporting Facility (for example, where the ticker symbol for the security is no longer available or a market participant identifier is no longer active), members shall report such transactions as soon as practicable to the NASD Market Regulation Department on Form T. Transactions that can be reported to NASD electronically, whether on trade date or on a subsequent date on an “as of” basis (T+N), shall not be reported on Form T. Fifth, members will not be permitted to aggregate individual executions of orders in a security at the same price into a single transaction report submitted to the NASD/NSX TRF. Thus, the proposed rule change does not contain a counterpart to NASD Rule 4632(f) or NASD Rule 6100(e) permitting “bunched” trades to be reported to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF. Finally, cancellation of any trade that has been submitted to the NASD/NSX TRF must be reported in accordance with proposed NASD Rule 4632C(f). For trades that are cancelled after the day of execution of the trade or trade cancellations that are not reported on the day of execution of the trade, members must contact Trade Reporting Facility Operations to report the trade cancellation. NASD notes that the proposed rule change does not include any proposed rules relating to fees, assessments and credits specifically related to the NASD/NSX TRF. Fees, assessments and credits, if any, with respect to the NASD/NSX TRF will be the subject of a future rule filing with the SEC. Proposed Amendments to Certain Existing NASD Rules Although not explicitly detailed herein, it is important to note that all other NASD rules that apply to over-the-counter trading generally will apply to trades reported to the NASD/NSX TRF. However, certain NASD rules must be amended in order to reflect the operation of more than one Trade Reporting Facility. NASD Rule 5100 (Short Sale Rule), which restricts short selling on a “downbid,” will apply to transactions reported to the NASD/NSX TRF. The text of that rule currently provides that, with respect to trades reported to NASD's Alternative Display Facility or the Trade Reporting Facility, no member shall effect a short sale in a Nasdaq Global Market Security otherwise than on an exchange at or below the current national best (inside) bid when the current national best (inside) bid is below the preceding national best (inside) bid. NASD is proposing a technical amendment to NASD Rule 5100 to change the reference to “the Trade Reporting Facility” to “a Trade Reporting Facility” to clarify that the rule applies to trades reported to any Trade Reporting Facility established by NASD. NASD is proposing an identical technical amendment to NASD Interpretive Material (IM)-5100(b) to change the reference to “the Trade Reporting Facility” to “a Trade Reporting Facility.” NASD believes that the current language is too narrow and may suggest that the rule applies only to trades reported to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF. In addition, NASD Rule 6120 currently provides that participation in the System 19 is mandatory for members that are participants of a clearing agency registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 17A of the Act, and for members that have a clearing arrangement with such a participant, unless a member subscribes to TRACS. NASD is proposing to amend this rule to provide that participation in the System is mandatory for any member that has an obligation to report an over-the-counter transaction to NASD, unless the member has an alternative mechanism pursuant to NASD rules for reporting and clearing such transaction. Thus, for example, participation in the System under NASD Rule 6120 for purposes of reporting trades in Nasdaq-listed equity securities would not be mandatory for a member that is a Participant in the NASD/NSX TRF. 19 “System” is defined in NASD Rule 6110(m) to mean the NASD/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility, the trade reporting service of the ITS/CAES System, and the OTC Reporting Facility. Proposed New Rule Relating to Multiple Market Participant Symbols NASD is proposing a new rule in the NASD Rule 5000 Series (Trading Otherwise Than On An Exchange) relating to the use of multiple Market Participant Symbols (“MPIDs”) by members using a Trade Reporting Facility established by NASD. Proposed NASD Rule 5140 (Multiple MPIDs for Trade Reporting Facility Participants) would provide that any Trade Reporting Facility Participant that wishes to use more than one MPID for purposes of reporting trades to a Trade Reporting Facility must submit a written request to, and obtain approval from, NASD Operations for such additional MPID(s). In addition, NASD is proposing new NASD Interpretive Material (IM)-5140 stating that NASD considers the issuance of, and trade reporting with, multiple MPIDs to be a privilege and not a right. A Trade Reporting Facility Participant must identify the purpose(s) for which the multiple MPIDs will be used. If NASD determines that the use of multiple MPIDs is detrimental to the marketplace, or that a Trade Reporting Facility Participant is using one or more additional MPIDs improperly or for other than the purpose(s) identified by the Participant, NASD staff retains full discretion to limit or withdraw its grant of the additional MPID(s) to such Trade Reporting Facility Participant for purposes of reporting trades to a Trade Reporting Facility. NASD believes that the proposed new rule and interpretive material are necessary in order to consolidate the process of issuing multiple MPIDs with NASD. 20 20 Currently, members that use the NASD/Nasdaq TRF are able to obtain and use multiple MPIDs upon request. NASD notes that NASD/Nasdaq TRF Participants using existing multiple MPIDs will be grandfathered and will not be required to submit a new form to NASD Operations in order to continue using their MPIDs. However, any such Participant wishing to obtain additional MPIDs after implementation of proposed NASD Rule 5140 would need the approval of NASD Operations. To the extent that a Participant is a member of multiple SROs and intends to use the MPID(s) on multiple SRO systems, NASD will work with the other SRO(s) to coordinate the MPID approval process. NASD will announce the effective date of the proposed rule change no later than 30 days following Commission approval. 2. Statutory Basis NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, 21 which requires, among other things, that NASD rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, 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 protect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. NASD believes that establishment of the NASD/NSX TRF is in the public interest and appropriate for the protection of investors and the maintenance of fair and orderly markets because it will provide members another mechanism to report transactions in Nasdaq-listed equity securities effected otherwise than on an exchange. 21 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 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 is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NASD-2006-108 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-108. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of NASD. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-108 and should be submitted on or before October 18, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 22 22 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). J. Lynn Taylor, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-15792 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION Sentencing Guidelines for United States Courts AGENCY: United States Sentencing Commission. ACTION: Notice of final action regarding amendments to Federal sentencing guidelines effective November 1, 2006; correction. SUMMARY: On May 1, 2006, the Commission submitted to Congress amendments to the federal sentencing guidelines and published these amendments in the **Federal Register** on May 15, 2006. See 71 FR 28063. The Commission has made technical and conforming amendments to commentary provisions related to those amendments and has made a correction to the amendatory language of one amendment. DATES: The Commission has specified an effective date of November 1, 2006, for the amendments set forth in this notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Courlander, Public Affairs Officer, telephone:
(202)502-4590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Sentencing Commission, an independent commission in the judicial branch of the United States government, is authorized by 28 U.S.C. 994(a) to promulgate sentencing guidelines and policy statements for federal courts. Section 994 also directs the Commission to review and revise periodically promulgated guidelines and authorizes it to submit guideline amendments to Congress not later than the first day of May each year. See 28 U.S.C. 994(o), (p). Absent an affirmative disapproval by the Congress within 180 days after the Commission submits its amendments, the amendments become effective on the date specified by the Commission (typically November 1 of the same calendar year). 28 U.S.C. 994(p). Unlike amendments made to sentencing guidelines, amendments to commentary may be made at any time and are not subject to congressional review. To the extent practicable, the Commission endeavors to include amendments to commentary in any submission of guideline amendments to Congress. Occasionally, however, the Commission determines that technical and conforming changes to commentary are necessary in order to execute correctly the amendments submitted to Congress. This notice sets forth technical and conforming amendments to commentary related to the amendments submitted to Congress on May 1, 2006, that will become effective date on November 1, 2006. This notice also sets forth a correction to amendatory language. Authority: USSC Rules of Practice and Procedure 4.1. Ricardo H. Hinojosa, Chair. 1. Amendment The Commentary to § 2B1.1 captioned “Application Notes” is amended in Note 7(C) by striking “§ 2J1.7” and inserting “§ 3C1.3”. The Commentary to § 2K2.1 captioned “Application Notes”, as amended by Amendment 9 submitted to Congress on May 1, 2006 (71 FR 28069.; USSG App. C (amendment 691)), is further amended in Note 3 by inserting “ *Definition of `Prohibited Person'.* —” before “For purposes”; and in Note 11, as redesignated by Amendment 9 (USSG App. C (amendment 691)), by striking “Note 8” and inserting “Note 7”. The Commentary to § 2K2.4 captioned “Application Notes” is amended in Note 4 by striking “(b)(5)” each place it appears and inserting “(b)(6)”. Reason for Amendment: This amendment makes various technical and conforming amendments in order to execute properly amendments submitted to the Congress on May 1, 2006, and that will become effective on November 1, 2006. Specifically, the amendment conforms guideline references in the commentary of §§ 2B1.1 (Theft, Property Destruction, and Fraud), 2K2.1 (Unlawful Receipt, Possession, or Transportation of Firearms or Ammunition), and 2K2.4 (Use of Firearm, Armor-Piercing Ammunition, or Explosive During or in Relation to Certain Crimes) to redesignated guideline provisions and adds a heading to Application Note 3 in § 2K2.1. 2. Correction In the **Federal Register** published on May 15, 2006 (71 FR 28063), make the following correction: On page 28071, in column 3, correct the second amendatory instruction to read as follows: Section 2L1.1(c) is amended by striking “If any person” through the end of “Subpart 1” and inserting the following: [FR Doc. E6-15782 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 2211-01-P UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION Sentencing Guidelines for United States Courts AGENCY: United States Sentencing Commission. ACTION: Notice of final priorities. SUMMARY: In August 2006, the Commission published a notice of possible policy priorities for the amendment cycle ending May 1, 2007. See 77 FR 44344 (August 4, 2006). After reviewing public comment received pursuant to the notice of proposed priorities, the Commission has identified its policy priorities for the upcoming amendment cycle and hereby gives notice of these policy priorities. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Courlander, Public Affairs Officer, telephone:
(202)502-4590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Sentencing Commission is an independent agency in the judicial branch of the United States Government. The Commission promulgates sentencing guidelines and policy statements for Federal sentencing courts pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(a). The Commission also periodically reviews and revises previously promulgated guidelines pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(o) and submits guideline amendments to the Congress not later than the first day of May each year pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(p). As part of its statutory authority and responsibility to analyze sentencing issues, including operation of the federal sentencing guidelines, the Commission has identified its policy priorities for the amendment cycle ending May 1, 2007, and possibly continuing into the amendment cycle ending May 1, 2008. The Commission recognizes, however, that other factors, such as the enactment of any legislation requiring Commission action, may affect the Commission's ability to complete work on any or all of its identified priorities by the statutory deadline of May 1, 2007. Accordingly, it may be necessary to continue work on any or all of these issues beyond the amendment cycle ending on May 1, 2007. As so prefaced, the Commission has identified the following priorities:
(1)Implementation of crime legislation enacted during the 109th Congress warranting a Commission response, including
(A)the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, Pub. L. 109-248;
(B)the Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act, Pub. L. 109-181;
(C)the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109-177;
(D)the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization of 2005, Pub. L. 109-164;
(E)the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109-162;
(F)the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, Pub. L. 109-59; and
(G)other legislation authorizing statutory penalties, creating new offenses, or pertaining to victims, that requires incorporation into the guidelines;
(2)Continuation of its work with the congressional, executive, and judicial branches of the government and other interested parties on appropriate responses to *United States* v. *Booker,* including any appropriate guideline changes in light of the Commission's 2006 report to Congress, *Final Report on the Impact of United States* v. *Booker on Federal Sentencing,* and continuation of its analysis of post- *Booker* data, case law, and other feedback, including reasons for departures and variances stated by sentencing courts;
(3)Continuation of its policy work regarding immigration offenses, specifically, offenses sentenced under §§ 2L1.1 (Smuggling, Transporting, or Harboring an Unlawful Alien) and 2L1.2 (Unlawfully Entering or Remaining in the United States) and implementation of any immigration legislation that may be enacted;
(4)Continuation of its work with the congressional, executive, and judicial branches of the government and other interested parties on cocaine sentencing policy, including holding a hearing on this issue and reevaluating the Commission's 2002 report to Congress, *Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy;*
(5)Beginning of a guideline simplification effort to develop and consider possible options that might improve the overall effectiveness of the sentencing guidelines;
(6)Continuation of its policy work, in light of the Commission's prior research on criminal history, to develop and consider possible options that might improve the operation of Chapter Four (Criminal History);
(7)Continuation of its policy work to implement 28 U.S.C. 994(t), specifically regarding the development of further commentary to § 1B1.13 (Reduction in Term of Imprisonment as a Result of Motion by Director of Bureau of Prisons); and
(8)Resolution of a number of circuit conflicts, pursuant to the Commission's continuing authority and responsibility, under 28 U.S.C. 991(b)(1)(B) and *Braxton* v. *United States,* 500 U.S. 344 (1991), to resolve conflicting interpretations of the guidelines by the federal courts. Authority: 28 U.S.C. 994(a), (o); USSC Rules of Practice and Procedure 5.2. Ricardo H. Hinojosa, Chair. [FR Doc. E6-15783 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 2211-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #10597 and #10598] New Mexico Disaster Number NM-00004 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 2. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of New Mexico (FEMA-1659-DR), dated 8/30/2006. *Incident:* Severe Storms and Flooding. *Incident Period:* 7/26/2006 and continuing through 9/18/2006. DATES: *Effective Date:* 9/18/2006. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 10/30/2006. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:* 5/30/2007. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the State of New Mexico, dated 8/30/2006, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 7/26/2006 and continuing through 9/18/2006. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Roger B. Garland, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E6-15774 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Privacy Act of 1974; Computer Matching Program AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Notice of a computer matching program—SBA and the Mississippi Development Authority (MDA). SUMMARY: In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended by the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, and the Computer Matching Privacy Act Amendments of 1990, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)Guidelines on the Conduct of Matching Programs and OMB Bulletin 89-22, “Instructions on Reporting Computer Matching Programs to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Congress and the Public”, the Small Business Administration
(SBA)is issuing a public notice of its intent to conduct a computer matching program with MDA which uses a computer information system of SBA. The purpose of the computer matching program is to ensure that there is no duplication of benefits (DOB), as prohibited by the Small Business Act, between SBA disaster loans made to homeowners in Mississippi affected by the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes and MDA grants to the same homeowners. DATES: This matching program is expected to begin October 27, 2006. Any public comment must be received before this expected start date. ADDRESSES: Any interested party may submit written comments to Small Business Administration, Office of Disaster Assistance, 409 3rd Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: On the matching program: Becky Brantley, Disaster External Affairs Liaison, 202-205-6734; and on the Privacy Act: Lisa Babcock, Chief, Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts Office, 202-401-8203. SUPPLEMETARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to subsection
(o)of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (15 U.S.C. 552a), the SBA and MDA have concluded an agreement to conduct a computer matching program between the agencies. The purpose of the computer matching program is to exchange personal data to identify individuals who have been approved for an SBA home disaster loan as a result of the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes and who seek to obtain a grant from the MDA for the same loss. Only homeowners whose principal residences are in Harrison, Hancock, Jackson and Pearl River Counties, Mississippi will be eligible to receive MDA grants. Matching the information will prevent a DOB between an SBA disaster loan and an MDA grant to the same homeowner. Section 7(b)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)) prohibits SBA, in making physical disaster loans, from duplicating the benefits that recipients of such loans may receive from other sources. The parties to the agreement have determined that a computer matching program is the most efficient, expeditious, and effective means of obtaining and processing the information needed to make a decision on whether there is a DOB. The principal alternative to using this matching program would be to manually match the loan applications processed by SBA with the grant applications submitted to the MDA. Manual matching would impose an administrative burden on the agencies and might result in delays in determining eligibility for MDA grants to affected victims of the hurricanes. A copy of the agreement between SBA and MDA is available on request. Requests should be submitted to the same address listed above for comments. Reporting of Matching Program In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended by the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-503) and the Computer Matching Privacy Act Amendments of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-56) (collectively, the Law), and OMB Bulletin 89-22, copies of this notice are being provided to the House Committee on Government Reform and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and to OMB. Authority The matching program will be conducted pursuant to the Law. Objectives To Be Met by the Matching Program The matching program will allow MDA and SBA to share data in order to prevent an applicant for an MDA grant from receiving a DOB with an SBA home disaster loan. Records To Be Matched The SBA records involved in the match are home loan applications received by SBA from disaster victims in Harrison, Hancock, Jackson and Pearl River counties in Mississippi as a result of the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes. These home loan application records are contained in the SBA Privacy Act System of Records: Disaster Loan Case File—SBA 20, last published at 69 FR 58598. Period of the Match The computer matching program will be conducted in accordance with the agreement between SBA and the MDA. The agreement will remain in effect until the last MDA grant award has been processed by MDA or December 31, 2006, whichever is earlier. The agreement may be extended by mutual agreement of the parties. Either SBA or MDA, upon thirty
(30)days written notice, may request an extension or may terminate the agreement. Charles McClam, Acting Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E6-15775 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION The Ticket To Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel Meeting AGENCY: Social Security Administration (SSA). ACTION: Notice of Teleconference. DATES: October 18, 2006—2 p.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time. Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel Conference Call. Call-in number: 1-888-790-4158. Pass code: PANEL TELECONFERENCE. Leader/Host: Berthy De la Rosa-Aponte. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Type of meeting:* On October 18, 2006, the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel (the “Panel”) will hold a teleconference. This teleconference meeting is open to the public. *Purpose:* In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Social Security Administration
(SSA)announces this teleconference meeting of the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel. Section 101(f) of Public Law 106-170 establishes the Panel to advise the President, the Congress, and the Commissioner of SSA on issues related to work incentive programs, planning, and assistance for individuals with disabilities as provided under section 101(f)(2)(A) of the Act. The Panel is also to advise the Commissioner on matters specified in section 101(f)(2)(B) of that Act, including certain issues related to the Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Program established under section 101(a). The interested public is invited to listen to the teleconference by calling the phone number listed above. Public testimony will be taken from 3:30 p.m. until 4 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. You must be registered to give public comment. Contact information is given at the end of this notice. *Agenda:* The full agenda for the meeting will be posted on the Internet at *http://www.ssa.gov/work/panel* at least one week before the starting date or can be received, in advance, electronically or by fax upon request. *Contact Information:* Records are kept of all proceedings and will be available for public inspection by appointment at the Panel office. Anyone requiring information regarding the Panel should contact the staff by: • Mail addressed to the Social Security Administration, Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel Staff, 400 Virginia Avenue, SW., Suite 700, Washington, DC 20024.Telephone contact with Tinya White-Taylor at
(202)358-6430. • Fax at
(202)358-6440. • E-mail to *TWWIIAPanel@ssa.gov.* • To register for the public comment portion of the meeting please contact Tinya White-Taylor by calling
(202)358-6430 or by e-mail to *tinya.white-taylor@ssa.gov.* Dated: September 19, 2006. Chris Silanskis, Designated Federal Officer. [FR Doc. E6-15796 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4191-02-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5516] Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor; Renewal of Charter of the Advisory Committee on Persons With Disabilities and Request for New Member Applications SUMMARY: The Charter of the Advisory Committee on Persons with Disabilities was renewed for a second two-year term on June 26, 2006 and applications are being solicited to fill one vacant position on the Committee. Established on June 23, 2004, and rechartered on June 26, 2006, the Advisory Committee on Persons with Disabilities serves the Secretary and the Administrator in an advisory capacity with respect to the consideration of the interests of persons with disabilities in formulation and implementation of U.S. foreign policy and foreign assistance. The Committee is established under the general authority of the Secretary and the Department of State as set forth in Title 22 of the United States Code, in particular Sections 2656 and 2651a, and in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended. The Committee is made up of the Secretary of State, the Administrator of the Agency for International Development and an Executive Director (all ex-officio members); and eight members from outside the United States government. The non-government members of the Committee represent a cross section from not-for-profit organizations, public policy organizations, academic institutions, corporations and other experts on foreign policy or development issues related to persons with disabilities. The current non-government members are: Senda Benaissa, Joni Eareckson Tada, Vail Horton, John Kemp, Albert H. Linden, Jr., Kathleen Martinez, and John Register. One non-government position on the Committee is currently vacant, and applications are now being accepted for that position. Individuals who wish to be considered for membership may forward their resumes to Stephanie Ortoleva, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, U.S. Department of State, 2201 C St., NW., Room 7822, Washington, DC 20520 by overnight or express mail (not regular postal mail), or by fax to: 202-647-4434 or, in electronic form, to: *ortolevas@state.gov.* All letters of interest and resumes must be received by October 10, 2006. The Secretary along with the Administrator of the Agency for International Development will appoint the new member from a list comprised of candidates who apply by the above deadline and candidates from other sources. The term of membership will be 2 years. Dated: September 21, 2006. Stephanie Ortoleva, Foreign Affairs Officer and Advisory Committee Executive Director, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Department of State. [FR Doc. E6-15836 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-18-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5554] Shipping Coordinating Committee; Notice of Meeting The Shipping Coordinating Committee
(SHC)will conduct an open meeting at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, October 10, 2006, in Room 1422 of the United States Coast Guard Headquarters Building, 2100 2nd Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001. The purpose of this meeting is to prepare for the Ninety-second Session of the International Maritime Organization's
(IMO)Legal Committee (LEG 92) scheduled from 16-20 October 2006. The provisional LEG 92 agenda calls for the Legal Committee to further examine the draft Wreck Removal Convention. To be addressed as well are the Provisions of Financial Security which includes a progress report on the work of the Joint IMO/ILO Ad Hoc Expert Working Group on Liability and Compensation regarding claims for Death, Personal Injury and Abandonment of Seafarers; and includes follow-up on resolutions adopted by the International Conference on the Revision of the Athens Convention relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea, 1974. The Legal Committee will review the Guidelines on fair treatment of seafarers in the event of a maritime accident. Also on the LEG 92 agenda are monitoring of the implementation of the HNS Convention, matters arising from the ninety-sixth session of the Council, and election of officers. Finally the committee will review technical cooperation activities related to maritime legislation, biennium activities within the context of the Organization's Strategic Plan, and the status of Conventions and other treaty instruments adopted as a result of the work of the Legal Committee, in addition to allotting time to address any other issues that may arise on the Legal Committee's work program. Members of the public are invited to attend the SHC meeting up to the seating capacity of the room. To facilitate the building security process, those who plan to attend should call or send an e-mail two days before the meeting. Upon request, participating by phone may be an option. For further information please contact Captain Charles Michel or Lieutenant Commander Laurina Spolidoro, at U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Maritime and International Law (G-LMI), 2100 Second Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001; e-mail *Laurina.M.Spolidoro@uscg.mil,* telephone
(202)372-3794; fax
(202)372-3972. Dated: September 21, 2006. Michael Tousley, Executive Secretary, Shipping Coordinating Committee, Department of State. [FR Doc. E6-15835 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-09-P TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY [Meeting No. 06-05] Sunshine Act Meeting Time and Date: 10 a.m., September 29, 2006. Walker County Civic Center, 10052 North Highway 27, Rock Spring, Georgia 30739. Status: Open. Agenda Old Business Approval of minutes of July 28, 2006, Board Meeting. New Business 1. President's Report. 2. Report of the Finance, Strategy, and Rates Committee. A. Power supply arrangements with Bristol, Virginia. B. Extension of power supply arrangements with Warren Rural Electric Cooperative Corporation. C. Termination of Limited Interruptible Power
(LIP)and Limited Firm Power
(LFP)Programs. 3. Report of the Operations, Environment, and Safety Committee. A. Contract with Stone and Webster Construction, Inc., for supplemental maintenance and modifications for TVA nuclear operating units and for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Unit 1 recovery. B. Revisions to the approval of the contract with Louisiana Energy Services, L.P., for uranium enrichment services for Sequoyah and Watts Bar Nuclear Plants Units 1. 4. Report of the Audit and Ethics Committee. 5. Report of the Community Relations Committee. 6. Report of the Human Resources Committee. A. TVA's contribution to the TVA Retirement System. B. Delegation of authority to the Chief Executive Officer to approve trustees, Retirement System investment managers and their agreements, and retirement plan amendments which do not increase plan liabilities or have a direct cost impact on TVA. C. Renewal and extension of interim human resource and labor relations delegations until December 31, 2006. D. Award of contract to Medco to administer TVA's prescription drug plan for employees and retirees. E. FY 2007 Corporate Scorecard. F. Other. 7. Report of the Corporate Governance Committee. 8. Approval of Committee charters. 9. Information item approved by the Board previously. A. Selection of William Stanley Orser as Interim Chief Operating Officer. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Please call TVA Media Relations at
(865)632-6000, Knoxville, Tennessee. Information is also available at TVA's Washington Office
(202)898-2999. People who plan to attend the meeting and have special needs should call
(865)632-6000. Anyone who wishes to comment on any of the agenda in writing may send their comments to: TVA Board of Directors, Board Agenda Comments, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902. Dated: September 22, 2006. Maureen H. Dunn, General Counsel and Secretary. [FR Doc. 06-8335 Filed 9-25-06; 12:58 pm]
Connectionstraces to 10
12 references not yet in our index
  • 17 CFR 240.19
  • Pub. L. 109-248
  • Pub. L. 109-181
  • Pub. L. 109-177
  • Pub. L. 109-164
  • Pub. L. 109-162
  • Pub. L. 109-59
  • 500 U.S. 344
  • 15 USC 552a
  • Pub. L. 100-503
  • Pub. L. 101-56
  • Pub. L. 106-170
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of final action regarding amendments to Federal sentencing guidelines effective November 1, 2006; correction
U.S.C.§ 78s
U.S.C.§ 78f
U.S.C.§ 552
C.F.R.§ 200.30-3
U.S.C.§ 78c
U.S.C.§ 78o–3
U.S.C.§ 994
U.S.C.§ 991
U.S.C.§ 636
SCOTUS500 U.S. 344
Cite17 CFR 240.19
Pub. L.Pub. L. 109-248
Cites 22 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.