Notices. Notice of meeting
28,589 words·~130 min read·
/register/2006/10/19/06-8770A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Sport Fishing and Boating Partnership Council AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service announces that the Sport Fishing and Boating Partnership Council (Council) will meet November 8-9, 2006. DATES: The meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 8, 2006, from 12 p.m. to 5 p.m., and on Thursday, November 9, 2006, from 8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m.
Members of the public wishing to attend the meeting must notify Douglas Hobbs by close of business on Monday, November 6, 2006, per instructions under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Mills House Hotel, 115 Meeting Street, Charleston, SC 29401; telephone
(843)577-2400. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Hobbs, Council Coordinator, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Mailstop 3103-AEA, Arlington, Virginia 22203; telephone
(703)358-2336; fax
(703)358-2548; or via e-mail at *doug_hobbs@fws.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., notice is hereby given that the Sport Fishing and Boating Partnership Council will meet on Wednesday, November 8, 2006, from 12 p.m. to 5 p.m., and on Thursday, November 9, 2006, from 8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. at the Mills House Hotel in Charleston, South Carolina. The Council was formed in January 1993 to advise the Secretary of the Interior, through the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, about sport fishing and boating issues. The Council represents the interests of the public and private sectors of the sport fishing and boating communities and is organized to enhance partnerships among industry, constituency groups, and government. The 18-member Council, appointed by the Secretary of the Interior, includes the Director of the Service and the president of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, who both serve in ex officio (by virtue of office) capacities. Other Council members are Directors from State agencies responsible for managing recreational fish and wildlife resources and individuals who represent the interests of saltwater and freshwater recreational fishing, recreational boating, the recreational fishing and boating industries, recreational fisheries resource conservation, aquatic resource outreach and education, and tourism. Background information on the Council is available at *http://www.fws.gov/sfbpc.* The Council will convene to discuss:
(1)The Council's continuing role in providing input to the Fish and Wildlife Service on the Service's strategic plan for its Fisheries Program;
(2)the Council's work in addressing the issue of boating and fishing access;
(3)the Council's work in its role as a facilitator of discussions with Federal and State agencies and other sport fishing and boating interests concerning a variety of national boating and fisheries management issues;
(4)the Council's work to assess the clean Vessel Act Grant Program;
(5)a possible Council role in communicating with partners and stakeholders about the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund; and
(6)the Council's role in providing the Secretary of the Interior with information about the implementation of the Strategic Plan for the National Outreach and Communications Program, authorized by the 1998 Sportfishing and Boating Safety Act, that is now being implemented by the Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation, a private, nonprofit organization. The agenda may change to accommodate Council business. The final agenda will be posted on the Internet at *http://www.fws.gov/sfbpc.* Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions related to the Council's affairs are invited to request a place on the agenda. On November 9, 2006, time will be reserved for public comments, and speaking times will be assigned on a first-come, first-served basis. The amount of time per speaker will be determined by the number of requests received, but is likely to be 5 minutes each. Questions from the public will not be considered during this period. Speakers who wish to expand upon their oral statements, those who had wished to speak but could not be accommodated on the agenda, and those who were unable to attend in person are invited to submit written statements to the Sport Fishing and Boating Partnership Council, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Mailstop 3103-AEA, Arlington, Virginia 22203; via fax at
(703)358-2548; or via e-mail to *doug_hobbs@fws.gov.* All visitors are required to pre-register to be admitted. Anyone wishing to attend this meeting must register by close of business Monday, November 6, 2006. Please submit your name, estimated time of arrival, e-mail address, and phone number to Douglas Hobbs, and he will provide you with instructions for admittance. Mr. Hobbs' e-mail address is *doug_hobbs@fws.gov* and his phone number is
(703)358-2336. Summary minutes of the conference will be maintained by the Council Coordinator at 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS-3101-AEA, Arlington, VA 22203, and will be available for public inspection during regular business hours within 30 days following the meeting. Personal copies may be purchased for the cost of duplication. Dated: September 26, 2006. Marshall P. Jones, Jr., Acting Director. [FR Doc. E6-17418 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Draft National Management and Control Plan for the New Zealand Mudsnail ( Potamopyrgus antipodarum ) AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of document availability and request for comments. SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of the draft “National Management and Control Plan for the New Zealand Mudsnail ( *Potamopyrgus antipodarum* ).” The draft was prepared by the New Zealand Mudsnail Working Group of the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force. We are seeking public comments on this draft document. Comments received will be considered during the preparation of the final national management and control plan, which will guide cooperative and integrated management of Zealand mudsnails in the United States. DATES: Submit your comments on the draft “National Management and Control Plan for the New Zealand Mudsnail ( *Potamopyrgus antipodarum* )” by December 4, 2006. ADDRESSES: The draft document is available from the Executive Secretary, Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA, 22203; FAX
(703)358-1800. It also is available on our Web page at *http://www.anstaskforce.gov/.* Comments may be hand-delivered, mailed, or sent by fax to the address listed above. You may send comments by e-mail to: *NZmudsnailPlan@fws.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Newsham, Executive Secretary, Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, at *scott_newsham@fws.gov* or
(703)358-1796. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The New Zealand mudsnail ( *Potamopyrgus antipodarum* ) is indigenous to New Zealand and its adjacent islands. In New Zealand, the snails have been found in nearly every aquatic habitat including large rivers, forested tributary streams, thermal springs, ponds, glacial lakes, and estuaries. Over the past 150 years, New Zealand mudsnails have spread in three continents. Three different clones of New Zealand mudsnails have been identified in the United States: one is found in Lakes Ontario, Erie and Superior and is the same as Clone A found in Europe; the second is found in nine western States, having spread out from an initial population in the Snake River in Idaho; and the third has recently been identified in the Snake River, Idaho. It is speculated that the eastern U.S. clone came in ballast water from Europe and the western U.S. clones came from the commercial movement of aquaculture products such as trout eggs or live fish from Australia or New Zealand. The introduced populations of these tiny snails (up to 6 mm) are mostly all female, and the snails are live bearers. Males are present only rarely in North America. Densities of New Zealand mudsnails fluctuate widely, reaching 500,000 snails per square meter in some locations. A database established on the “New Zealand Mudsnail in the Western USA” Web site ( *http://www.esg.montana.edu/aim/mollusca/nzms/* ) is being used to track new populations and keep people informed about the latest research. A map showing affected watersheds is kept current by the Department of Ecology at Montana State University-Bozeman. In 2003, the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force (ANSTF), which is authorized by the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 4701 *et seq.* ), established the New Zealand Mudsnail Management Plan Working Group (Working Group) to create a national management and control plan for New Zealand mudsnails. The goal of the national management and control plan for New Zealand mudsnails is to prevent and delay the spread to new areas of the United States, reduce the impacts of existing and new populations, and continue developing information to meet this goal. The Working Group developed the following objectives:
(1)Identify foci, pathways and vectors;
(2)develop methods of detecting new populations;
(3)develop strategies and methods to control and manage populations;
(4)develop further understanding of ecological and economic impacts; and
(5)increase public understanding of the need to deal with New Zealand mudsnails and gain political support for implementing national plan objectives. We are seeking public comments on all aspects of the Working Group's draft “National Management and Control Plan for the New Zealand Mudsnail ( *Potamopyrgus antipodarum* ).” Submit your comments by the date listed in DATES using one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES . Authority: The authority for this action is the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 4701 *et seq.* ). Dated: September 25, 2006. Everett Wilson, Acting Co-Chair, Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, Acting Assistant Director—Fisheries & Habitat Conservation. [FR Doc. E6-17403 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [NM-910-07-0777-XX] Notice of Public Meeting, New Mexico Resource Advisory Council Meeting AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior. ACTION: Notice of public meeting. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, New Mexico Resource Advisory Council (RAC), will meet as indicated below. DATES: The meeting dates are December 6-7, 2006, at the Drury Inn and Suites, 4310 The 25 Way Northeast, Albuquerque, New Mexico. An optional field trip is planned for December 5, 2006. The public comment period is scheduled December 5, 2006, from 6-7 p.m. at the Drury Inn and Suites. The public may present written comments to the RAC. Depending on the number of individuals wishing to comment and time available, oral comments may be limited. The three established RAC working groups may have a late afternoon or an evening meeting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 15-member RAC advises the Secretary of the Interior, through the Bureau of Land Management, on a variety of planning and management issues associated with public land management in New Mexico. All meetings are open to the public. At this meeting, topics include issues on renewable and nonrenewable resources. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theresa Herrera, New Mexico State Office, Office of External Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, P.O. Box 27115, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87502-0115, 505.438.7517. Dated: October 13, 2006. Linda S.C. Rundell, State Director. [FR Doc. E6-17439 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-FB-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [NV-065-5870-EU; N-74961] Notice of Realty Action: Direct (Non-Competitive) Sale of Public Lands, Esmeralda County, NV AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Realty Action. SUMMARY: A 16.06 acre parcel of public land located near Dyer, Esmeralda County, Nevada, has been examined and found suitable for sale utilizing direct sale procedures. The authority for the sale is found under sections 203 and 209 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) [Pub. L. 94-579]. DATES: Comments regarding the proposed sale or the environmental assessment
(EA)must be received by the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM)on or before December 4, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments regarding the proposed sale or EA, should be addressed to the Assistant Field Manager, BLM Tonopah Field Station, 1553 South Main Street, P.O. Box 911, Tonopah, Nevada 89049. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding the proposed sale and the lands involved, can be obtained at the public reception desk at the BLM, Tonopah Field Station from 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except Federal holidays), or by contacting Wendy Seley, Realty Specialist, at the above address, or at
(775)482-7800 or by e-mail at *wseley@nv.blm.gov* . For general information on BLM's public land sale procedures, refer to the following Web address: *http://www.blm.gov/nhp/what/lands/realty/sales.htm.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The land is located approximately two miles west of Dyer, Nevada, and lies on the west side of Fish Lake Valley, Nevada. Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada T. 3 S., R. 35 E., Sec. 21, Lots 8, 9, 10, and 11. The area described contains 16.06 acres, more or less, in Esmeralda County. This parcel of public land is being offered for sale to Della Patterson of Dyer, Nevada, at no less than the appraised fair market value
(FMV)of $56,000.00, as determined by the authorized officer after appraisal. An appraisal report has been prepared by a state certified appraiser for the purposes of establishing FMV. These lands meet the criteria for direct sale, under 43 CFR 2711.3-3(a)(5), to resolve inadvertent unauthorized use and occupancy of the lands. Multiple dwellings, old cars, car parts, and a corral occupy the subject land. The size of the unauthorized use has been reduced to the smallest aliquot part identified through development of a supplemental plat. These lands are not required for Federal purposes. The disposal
(sale)of the parcel would serve an important public objective by resolving the management costs of an inadvertent unauthorized use of the public lands. As such, these lands meet the criteria found under Title 43 CFR 2710.0-3(a)(3) which states “Such tract, because of its location or other characteristics is difficult and uneconomic to manage as part of the public lands and is not suitable for management by another Federal department or agency.” Direct sale would not change the status quo in that no other land uses are expected for these lands. These lands are identified as suitable for disposal in the BLM Tonopah Resource Management Plan
(RMP)approved in October 1997. The proposed disposal action is consistent with the objectives, goals, and decisions of the RMP. The BLM provided a 30-day comment period for the preliminary EA as part of its public involvement. All comments received have been considered and incorporated into the EA and Decision Record. The environmental assessment, EA Number NV065-EA06-066, Decision Record, Environmental Site Assessment, map, and approved appraisal report covering the proposed sale, are available for review at the BLM, Tonopah Field Station, Tonopah, Nevada. Segregation Publication of this Notice in the **Federal Register** segregates the subject lands from all appropriations under the public land laws, including the general mining laws, except sale under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. The segregation will terminate upon issuance of the patent, upon publication in the **Federal Register** of a termination of the segregation or July 16, 2007, which ever occurs first. Terms and Conditions of Sale The patent issued would contain the following reservations, covenants, terms and conditions: 1. A right-of-way thereon for ditches and canals constructed by authority of the United States, Act of August 30, 1890 (43 U.S.C. 945). 2. Oil, gas, and geothermal resources are reserved on the land sold; permittees, licensees, and lessees retain the right to prospect for, mine, and remove the minerals owned by the United States under applicable law and any regulations that the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe, including all necessary access and exit rights. 3. All existing and valid land uses, including livestock grazing leases, unless waived. 4. Valid existing rights. 5. The purchaser/patentee, by accepting patent, agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold the United States harmless from any costs, damages, claims, causes of action, penalties, fines, liabilities, and judgments of any kind arising from the past, present or future acts or omissions of the patentee, its employees, agents, contractors, or lessees, or any third party arising out of or in connection with the patentee's use and/or occupancy of the patented real property resulting in:
(1)Violations of Federal, State, and local laws and regulations that are now, or in the future become, applicable to the real property;
(2)Judgments, claims or demands of any kind assessed against the United States;
(3)Costs, expenses, or damages of any kind incurred by the United States;
(4)Releases or threatened releases of solid or hazardous waste(s) and/or hazardous substances(s), as defined by Federal or State environmental laws, off, on, into or under land, property, and other interests of the United States;
(5)Other activities by which solids or hazardous substances or wastes, as defined by Federal and State environmental laws are generated, released, stored, used, or otherwise disposed of on the patented real property, and any cleanup response, remedial action or other actions related in any manner to said solid or hazardous substances or wastes; or
(6)Natural resource damages as defined by Federal and State law. This covenant shall be construed as running with the patented real property and may be enforced by the United States in a court of competent jurisdiction. 6. Pursuant to the requirements established by section 120(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), (42 U.S.C. 9620(h)), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1988, (100 Stat.1670), notice is hereby given that the above-described lands have been examined and no evidence was found to indicate that any hazardous substances have been stored for one year or more, nor had any hazardous substances been disposed of or released on the subject property. No warranty of any kind, express or implied, is given by the United States as to the title, physical condition or potential uses of the parcel of land proposed for sale, and the conveyance of any such parcel will not be on a contingency basis. It is the buyer's responsibility to be aware of all applicable local government policies and regulations that would affect the subject lands. It is also the buyer's responsibility to be aware of existing or prospective uses of nearby properties. Any land lacking access from a public road or highway will be conveyed as such, and future access acquisition will be the responsibility of the buyer. In the event of a sale, the unreserved mineral interests will be conveyed simultaneously with the sale of the land. These unreserved mineral interests have been determined to have no known mineral value pursuant to 43 CFR 2720.2(a). Acceptance of the sale offer will constitute an application for conveyance of those unreserved mineral interests. The purchaser will be required to pay a $50.00 non-refundable filing fee for conveyance of the available mineral interests. The purchaser will have 30 days from the date of receiving the sale offer to accept the offer and to submit a deposit of 20 percent of the purchase price, the $50.00 filing fee for conveyance of mineral interests, and for payment of publication costs. The purchaser must remit the remainder of the purchase price within 180 days from the date the sale offer is received. Payments must be by certified check, postal money order, bank draft or cashiers check. payable to the U.S. Department of the Interior—BLM. Failure to meet conditions established for this sale will void the sale and any monies received will be forfeited. Public Comments The subject parcel of land will not be offered for sale prior to the 60-day publication of this notice of realty action. For a period until December 4, 2006, interested parties may submit written comments to the BLM Tonopah Field Station, P.O. Box 911, Tonopah, Nevada 89049. Facsimiles, telephone calls, and electronic mails are unacceptable means of notification. Comments including names and street addresses of respondents will be available for public review at the Tonopah Field Station during regular business hours, except holidays. Individual respondents may request confidentiality. If you wish to withhold your name or address from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. Any determination by the BLM to release or withhold the names and/or addresses of those who comment will be made on a case-by-case basis. Such requests will be honored to the extent allowed by law. Any adverse comments will be reviewed by the Nevada State Director, who may sustain, vacate, or modify this realty action and issue a final determination. In the absence of timely filed objections, this realty action will become the final determination of the Department of the Interior. (Authority: 43 CFR 2711.1-2(a)) Dated: August 31, 2006. Alan R. Buehler, Acting Assistant Field Manager, Tonopah. [FR Doc. E6-17399 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-HC-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [MT-926-07-1420-BJ-TRST] Montana: Filing of Plat of Survey AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Montana State Office, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Filing of Plat of Survey. SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management
(BLM)will file the plat of survey of the lands described below in the BLM Montana State Office, Billings, Montana,
(30)days from the date of publication in the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marvin Montoya, Cadastral Surveyor, Branch of Cadastral Survey, Bureau of Land Management, 5001 Southgate Drive, Billings, Montana 59101-4669, telephone
(406)896-5124 or
(406)896-5009. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This survey was executed at the request of the Regional Director, Rocky Mountain Region, Billings, Montana, and was necessary to determine Trust and Tribal lands. The lands we surveyed are: Principal Meridian, Montana T. 27 N., R. 50 E. The plat, in 2 sheets, representing the corrective dependent resurvey of a portion of the subdivisional lines, a portion of the subdivision of sections 15 and 16, and the division of accretion lines in sections 15 and 16, and the dependent resurvey of a portion of the subdivisional lines, a portion of the subdivision of sections 14, 15, and 16, the adjusted original meanders of the former left bank of the Missouri River, downstream through sections 14, 15, and 16, and the subdivision of section 14, and the survey of the meanders of the present left bank of the Missouri River, downstream through sections 14 and 15, and through a portion of section 16, the limits of erosion, downstream through sections 14 and 15, the meanders of the former left bank of certain relicted channels in sections 14 and 15, and the medial line of certain relicted channels in sections 14 and 15, certain division of accretion and partition lines, and two islands Tracts 37 and 38, Township 27 North, Range 50 East, Principal Meridian, Montana, was accepted October 5, 2006. We will place a copy of the plat, in 2 sheets, and related field notes we described in the open files. They will be available to the public as a matter of information. If BLM receives a protest against this survey, as shown on this plat, in 2 sheets, prior to the date of the official filing, we will stay the filing pending our consideration of the protest. We will not officially file this plat, in 2 sheets, until the day after we have accepted or dismissed all protests and they have become final, including decisions or appeals. Dated: October 12, 2006. Thomas M. Deiling, Chief Cadastral Surveyor, Division of Resources. [FR Doc. E6-17422 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-$$-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Minerals Management Service Agency Information Collection Activities: Submitted for Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Minerals Management Service (MMS), Interior. ACTION: Notice of a new information collection (1010-NEW). SUMMARY: To comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), we are notifying the public that we have submitted to OMB an information collection request
(ICR)for a new approval of the paperwork requirements that address the narrative portion only of MMS's Coastal Impact Assistance Program
(CIAP)which is a grant program. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 gave responsibility to MMS for CIAP by amending Section 31 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1356a; Appendix A). This notice also provides the public a second opportunity to comment on the paperwork burden of these regulatory requirements. DATES: Submit written comments by November 20, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this information collection directly to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, *Attention:* Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior via OMB e-mail: ( *OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov* ); or by fax
(202)395-6566; identify with (1010-NEW). Submit a copy of your comments to the Department of the Interior, MMS, via: • MMS's Public Connect on-line commenting system, *https://ocsconnect.mms.gov* . Follow the instructions on the Web site for submitting comments. • E-mail MMS at *rules.comments@mms.gov.* Use Information Collection Number 1010-NEW, CIAP, in the subject line. • *Fax:* 703-787-1093. Identify with Information Collection Number 1010-NEW, CIAP. • Mail or hand-carry comments to the Department of the Interior; Minerals Management Service; *Attention:* Rules Processing Team (RPT); 381 Elden Street, MS-4024; Herndon, Virginia 20170-4817. Please reference “Information Collection 1010-NEW, CIAP” in your comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cheryl Blundon, Rules Processing Team,
(703)787-1600. You may also contact Cheryl Blundon to obtain a copy, at no cost, of the ICR and the authority that require the subject collection of information. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Coastal Impact Assistance Program. *OMB Control Number:* 1010-NEW. *Abstract:* With the passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), the Minerals Management Service
(MMS)was given responsibility for the Coastal Impact Assistance Program
(CIAP)through the amendment of Section 31 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1356a Appendix A). The program was authorized for FY 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010. The CIAP recognizes that impacts from Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS)oil and gas activities fall disproportionately on the coastal states and localities nearest to where the activities occur, and where associated facilities are located. The CIAP legislation appropriates money for eligible states and coastal political subdivisions for coastal restoration/improvement projects. MMS shall disburse $250 million for each FY 2007 through 2010 to eligible producing states and coastal political subdivisions
(CPSs)through a grant program. The funds allocated to each state are based on the proportion of qualified OCS revenues offshore the individual state to total qualified OCS revenues from all states. In order to receive funds, the states submit CIAP narratives detailing how the funds will be expended. Alabama, Alaska, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas are the only eligible states under EPAct. Counties, parishes, or equivalent units of government within those states lying all or in part within the coastal zone, as defined by section 304(1) of the Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA)1972, as amended, are the coastal political subdivisions eligible for CIAP funding, a total of 67 local jurisdictions. To approve a plan, legislation requires that the Secretary of the Interior must be able to determine that the funds will be used in accordance with EPAct criteria and that projects will use the funds according to the EPAct. To confirm appropriate use of funds, MMS requires affirmation of grantees meeting Federal, state, and local laws and adequate project descriptions. To accomplish this, MMS is providing in its CIAP Environmental Assessment a suggested narrative format to be followed by each applicant for a CIAP grant. This narrative will assist MMS in its review of applications to determine that adequate and appropriate measures were taken to meet the laws that affect the proposed coastal projects. This narrative will be submitted electronically as part of the grant application. At that time, applicants will be obliged to fill out several OMB-approved standard forms as well. Most of the eligible states and CPSs, as experienced grant applicants, will be familiar with this narrative request. This information collection request
(ICR)addresses the narrative portion only of the MMS CIAP grant program. *Frequency:* On occasion. *Estimated Number and Description of Respondents:* Approximately 73 total respondents. This includes 6 states and 67 boroughs, parishes, etc. *Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping “Hour” Burden:* The estimated annual “hour” burden for this information collection is a total of 12,600 hours. In calculating the burdens, we assumed that respondents perform certain requirements in the normal course of their activities. We consider these to be usual and customary and took that into account in estimating the burden. There are approximately six states and 67 parishes, boroughs, counties, etc. Submissions are generally on an occasion basis. The estimated annual “hour” burden for this information collection is a total of 12,600 hours. We expect each project narrative will take 42 hours to complete. We anticipate an average of 300 projects per year. Based on a cost factor of $50 per hour, we estimate the total annual cost to industry is $630,000 (42 hrs × 300 projects = 12,600 hrs × $50 per hour = $630,000). *Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping “Non-Hour Cost” Burden:* We have identified no paperwork “non-hour cost” burdens associated with the collection of information. *Public Disclosure Statement:* The PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501, *et seq.* ) provides that an agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Until OMB approves a collection of information, you are not obligated to respond. *Comments:* Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501, *et seq.* ) requires each agency “* * * to provide notice * * * and otherwise consult with members of the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of information * * *” Agencies must specifically solicit comments to:
(a)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the agency to perform its duties, including whether the information is useful;
(b)evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;
(c)enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(d)minimize the burden on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. To comply with the public consultation process according to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501, *et seq.* ), we published a **Federal Register** notice (71 FR 29666, May 23, 2006) outlining the collection of information and announcing that we would submit this ICR to OMB for approval. The notice provided the required 60-day comment period. We have received no comments in response to this effort. If you wish to comment in response to this notice, you may send your comments to the offices listed under the ADDRESSES section of this notice. OMB has up to 60 days to approve or disapprove the information collection but may respond after 30 days. Therefore, to ensure maximum consideration, OMB should receive public comments by November 20, 2006. *Public Comment Procedures:* MMS's practice is to make comments, including names and addresses of respondents, available for public review. If you wish your name and/or address to be withheld, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comment. MMS will honor the request to the extent allowable by the law; however, anonymous comments will not be considered. There may be circumstances in which we would withhold from the record a respondent's identity, as allowable by the law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comment. In addition, you must present a rationale for withholding this information. This rationale must demonstrate that disclosure “would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Unsupported assertions will not meet this burden. In the absence of exceptional, documentable circumstances, this information will be released. All submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be made available for public inspection in their entirety. *MMS Information Collection Clearance Officer:* Arlene Bajusz
(202)208-7744. Dated: August 2, 2006. E.P. Danenberger, Chief, Office of Offshore Regulatory Programs. [FR Doc. E6-17514 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Reclamation Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project, El Dorado County, CA AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement/environmental impact statement/environmental impact report (EIS/EIS/EIR) and notice of scoping meetings. SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
(TRPA)Compact and Chapter 5 of the TRPA Code of Ordinances, and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), the TRPA, and the California Tahoe Conservancy (Conservancy), intend to prepare a joint EIS/EIS/EIR. The EIS/EIS/EIR would evaluate a joint Reclamation and TRPA restoration project along the reach of the Upper Truckee River that extends from U.S. Highway 50 north to Lake Tahoe and its adjacent wetland. The purpose of the proposed action is to restore natural geomorphic processes and ecological functions in this lowest reach of the Upper Truckee River and the surrounding marsh to improve ecological values of the study area and help reduce the river's discharge of nutrients and sediment that diminish Lake Tahoe's clarity. The Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project is identified in TRPA's Environmental Improvement Program
(EIP)as a project that is necessary to restore and maintain environmental thresholds for the Lake Tahoe Basin. EIP projects are designed to achieve and maintain environmental thresholds that protect Tahoe's unique and valued resources. Two public scoping meetings will be held to solicit comments from interested parties to assist in determining the scope of the environmental analysis, including the alternatives to be addressed, and to identify the significant environmental issues related to the proposed action. DATES: The public scoping meeting dates are: • Tuesday, October 24, 2006, 12 to 2 p.m., South Lake Tahoe, California. • Tuesday, October 24, 2006, 6 to 8 p.m., South Lake Tahoe, California. In addition, the proposed project will be an agenda item at a TRPA Governing Board Meeting on Wednesday, October 25, 2006 in Stateline, Nevada (see agenda item at *http://www.trpa.org/ default.aspx?tabid=258)* . All comments are requested to be received by October 31, 2006. ADDRESSES: Scoping meetings will be held at the Inn By The Lake, Sierra Nevada Room, 3300 Lake Tahoe Boulevard, South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150. The TRPA meeting will be held at the TRPA Governing Board Rooms, 128 Market Street, Stateline, NV 89449. Written comments on the scope of the environmental document, alternatives, and impacts to be considered should be sent to Ms. Jacqui Grandfield, Natural Resources Program Manager, California Tahoe Conservancy, 1061 Third Street, South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150. If you would like to be included on the EIS/EIS/EIR mailing list, please contact Ms. Grandfield by e-mail at *upper_truckee_marsh.tahoecons.ca.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Myrnie Mayville, Environmental Specialist, Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific Region, 2800 Cottage Way, Room E-2606, Sacramento, CA, 95825-1898,
(916)978-5037, *mmayville@mp.usbr.gov* ; Ms. Jacqui Grandfield at the above address or
(530)542-5580, *upper_truckee_marsh@tahoecons.ca.gov* or Mr. Mike Elam, Associate Environmental Planner, Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, P.O. Box 5310, Stateline, NV, 89448 or
(775)588-4547 ext. 308, MElam@trpa.org. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Upper Truckee River has been substantially altered by land practices during the past 150 years. Throughout its watershed, the river has experienced ecosystem degradation typical of what has occurred elsewhere in the Basin. The river has been modified from its original conditions by human activities, such as logging; livestock grazing; roads; golf courses; an airport; and residential, commercial and industrial developments. These conditions have resulted in increased sediment and nutrient loads discharging into Lake Tahoe from the river, which contribute to the declining clarity of the lake. Human influences have also resulted in reduced habitat quality for plant, wildlife, and fish species in the watershed. Restoration of natural processes and ecological functions of the river is an important part of the response to the decline in lake clarity. Restoration planning for the marsh began in the early 1990s with studies conducted by the University of California. In 1995, the Conservancy commissioned a restoration planning and design study, which identified a tentatively preferred river restoration concept 2 years later. However, it was determined that river restoration required use of the entire Upper Truckee Marsh and, at that time the east side of the marsh was not owned by the Conservancy; therefore, this tentatively selected concept could not be pursued. In 1998, the Conservancy began planning and design of an initial phase of wetland restoration on a 23-acre portion of a study area located on the east side of the Upper Truckee River near Lake Tahoe. This is an area, called the Lower West Side Wetland Restoration Project (LWS), where the marsh had been previously filled during the construction of the adjacent Tahoe Keys. After careful investigations, planning, and design; extensive environmental review; and community outreach, the Conservancy approved restoration of 12 acres of wetland through fill removal as the LWS Project in 2001. Construction commenced in the summer of 2001 and was completed in the summer of 2003. In 2000, the Conservancy purchased 311 acres of land in the center of the marsh from a private party, bringing nearly the entire Truckee Marsh into public ownership. Currently, the majority of the study area is owned by the Conservancy, including the marsh and meadows surrounding the lower reach of Trout Creek. Restoration concepts encompassing the whole marsh and the lower reach of the river could be developed after the acquisition. As part of this process, the Conservancy has also conducted public access and recreation use management planning for the river, marsh, and beach. Initially, the Conservancy defined project objectives and desired outcomes to direct the restoration planning process. A comprehensive evaluation and documentation of the existing natural processes and functions in the study area were conducted to begin the alternatives planning process. This evaluation enabled the identification of potential restoration opportunities and constraints. Armed with detailed information about the river and marsh processes and ecological functions, the Conservancy hosted a design charrette ( *i.e.* , interactive workshop) for agencies and other stakeholders to identify the spectrum of potentially feasible restoration ideas to be considered in the development of concept plan alternatives. Four alternative concept plans, all developed to be potentially feasible, were formulated to represent a reasonable range of restoration approaches. The four concepts generated by this extensive process are four action alternatives being evaluated in the EIS/EIS/EIR. A preferred alternative will be identified after public review of the alternatives and public comments are received on the Draft EIS/EIS/EIR. To date, key stages of the Upper Truckee River and Wetland Restoration project have included the following: • Evaluating existing natural processes and functions of the Upper Truckee River and marsh in 2000 and 2001. • Establishing project objectives and desired outcomes in 2002, and updating them in 2005. • Defining restoration opportunities and constraints in 2002 and 2003. • Conducting a restoration design charrette in 2003 to receive input from stakeholders on project priorities, concerns and constraints, and design ideas. • Conducting hydraulic modeling studies to support the development and evaluation of project alternatives. • Initial development and comparative evaluation of four conceptual restoration alternatives in 2004 and 2005. • Regulatory agency review of alternative concepts for key issues and regulatory requirements in 2005. • Further refinement and evaluation of the alternatives, and preparation of a Concept Plan Report (July 2006). Project Objectives The following objectives were developed for the proposed action: • Objective 1. Restore natural and self-sustaining river and floodplain processes and functions. • Objective 2. Protect, enhance, and restore naturally functioning habitats. • Objective 3. Restore and enhance fish and wildlife habitat quality. • Objective 4. Improve water quality through enhancement of natural physical and biological processes. • Objective 5. Protect and, where feasible, expand Tahoe yellow cress populations. • Objective 6. Provide public access, access to vistas, and environmental education at the Lower West Side and Cove East Beach. • Objective 7. Avoid increasing flood hazard on adjacent private property. • Objective 8. Design with sensitivity to the site's history and cultural heritage. • Objective 9. Design the wetland/urban interface to help provide habitat value and water quality benefits. • Objective 10. Implement a public health and safety program, including mosquito monitoring and control. The following alternatives will be considered at an equal level of detail in the EIS/EIS/EIR: • Alternative 1, Channel Aggradation and Narrowing (Maximum Recreation Infrastructure); • Alternative 2, New Channel—West Meadow (Minimum Recreation Infrastructure); • Alternative 3, Middle Marsh Corridor (Moderate Recreation Infrastructure); • Alternative 4, Inset Floodplain (Moderate Recreation Infrastructure); and • Alternative 5, No Project/No Action. Alternative 1 would include raising and reconfiguring a portion of the main channel, reconfiguring two sections of split channel, reducing the capacity of the river mouth, changing the hydrologic connectivity of the sailing lagoon, constructing a river corridor barrier to reduce wildlife disturbance, restoring sand dunes at Cove East, re-routing an existing recreational trail, and developing several new recreational components (i.e., full- and self-service visitor centers, pedestrian and bicycle trails, boardwalks, viewing platforms), an interpretive program, and signage. Alternative 2 would include excavation of a new channel and fill of a portion of the existing channel, constructing a new river mouth, changing the hydrologic connectivity of the sailing lagoon, constructing a river corridor barrier to reduce wildlife disturbance, and restoring sand dunes at Cove East, re-routing an existing recreational trail, constructing observation platforms, and developing an interpretive program and signage. Alternative 3 would include excavation of a new channel and fill of a portion of the existing channel, reducing the capacity of the river mouth, changing the hydrologic connectivity of the sailing lagoon, re-routing an existing recreational trail, developing several new recreational components ( *i.e.* , self-service visitor center, pedestrian and bicycle trails, boardwalks, viewing platforms), and an interpretive program and signage. Alternative 4 would include excavation of portions of the meadow surface along the corridor of the existing channel to create an inset floodplain, reducing the capacity of the river mouth, constructing a river corridor barrier to reduce wildlife disturbance, ( *i.e.* , self-service visitor center, pedestrian and bicycle trails, boardwalks, viewing platforms), and an interpretive program and signage. Under Alternative 5, existing conditions on the project site would be projected into the future. Potential Federal involvement may include the approval of the proposed action and partial funding of the river restoration component of the proposed action. The EIS will be combined with an EIR prepared by the Conservancy pursuant to the CEQA and an EIS prepared by the TRPA pursuant to its Compact and Chapter 5 of the TRPA Code of Ordinances. Additional Information The environmental review will be conducted pursuant to NEPA, CEQA, TRPA's Compact and Chapter 5 of the TRPA Code of Ordinances, the Federal and State Endangered Species Acts, and other applicable laws, to analyze the potential environmental impacts of implementing a range of feasible alternatives. Public input on the range of alternatives proposed for detailed consideration will be sought through the public scoping process. The EIS/EIS/EIR will assess potential impacts to any Indian Trust Assets or environmental justice issues. There are no known Indian Trust Assets or environmental justice issues associated with the proposed action. Input about concerns or issues related to Indian Trust Assets are requested from potentially affected federally recognized Indian Tribes and individual Indians. Our practice is to make comments, including names, home addresses, home phone numbers, and e-mail addresses of respondents, available for public review. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their names and/or home addresses, etc., but if you wish us to consider withholding this information you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. In addition, you must present a rationale for withholding this information. This rationale must demonstrate that disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy. Unsupported assertions will not meet this burden. In the absence of exceptional, documentable circumstances, this information will be released. We will always make submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. Robert Eckart, Acting Regional Environmental Officer, Mid-Pacific Region. [FR Doc. E6-17427 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-MN-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Inv. No. 337-TA-585] In the Matter of Certain Engines, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Investigation AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Institution of investigation pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on September 19, 2006, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of American Honda Motor Company, Incorporated of Torrance, California. A supplement to the complaint was filed on October 10, 2006. The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 in the importation into the United States and sale of certain engines, components thereof, and products containing the same by reason of infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,706,769 and U.S. Patent No. 6,250,273. The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a permanent exclusion order and a permanent cease and desist order. ADDRESSES: The complaint, except for any confidential information contained therein, is available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Room 112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-2000. Hearing impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at *http://www.usitc.gov.* The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket
(EDIS)at *http://edis.usitc.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vu Q. Bui, Esq., Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone
(202)205-2582. Authority: The authority for institution of this investigation is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and in section 210.10 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2006). *Scope of Investigation:* Having considered the complaint, the U.S. International Trade Commission, on October 13, 2006, ordered that—
(1)Pursuant to subsection
(b)of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain engines, components thereof, or products containing the same by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 5,706,769 and claims 1 and 2 of U.S. Patent No. 6,250,273, and whether an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;
(2)For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of investigation shall be served:
(a)The complainant is—American Honda Motor Company, Incorporated, 1919 Torrance Boulevard, Torrance, CA 90501.
(b)The respondent is the following entity alleged to be in violation of section 337, and is the party upon which the complaint is to be served: Wuxi Kipor Power Co., Ltd., Jingyi Road, Wangzhuang High Tech Industrial Development Zone Stage 3, Wuxi, Jiangsu, China 214028.
(c)The Commission investigative attorney, party to this investigation, is Vu Q. Bui, Esq., Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Suite 401, Washington, DC 20436; and
(3)For the investigation so instituted, the Honorable Paul J. Luckern is designated as the presiding administrative law judge. Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be submitted by the named respondents in accordance with section 210.13 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(d) and 210.13(a), such responses will be considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless good cause therefor is shown. Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of a limited exclusion order or cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent. By order of the Commission. Issued: October 13, 2006. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E6-17512 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration Importer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Application Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 958(i), the Attorney General shall, prior to issuing a registration under this Section to a bulk manufacturer of a controlled substance in schedule I or II and prior to issuing a regulation under 21 U.S.C. 952(a) authorizing the importation of such a substance, provide manufacturers holding registrations for the bulk manufacture of the substance an opportunity for a hearing. Therefore, in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on August 30, 2006, Tocris Cookson, Inc., 16144 Westwoods Business Park, Ellisville, Missouri 63021-7683, made application by letter to the Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA)to be registered as an importer of Marihuana (7360), a basic class of controlled substance listed in schedule I. The company plans to import this product for non-clinical laboratory based research only. Any manufacturer who is presently, or is applying to be, registered with DEA to manufacture such basic class of controlled substance may file comments or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration and may, at the same time, file a written request for a hearing on such application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 and in such form as prescribed by 21 CFR 1316.47. Any such written comments or objections being sent via regular mail should be addressed, in quintuplicate, to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, Washington, DC 20537, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/ODL; or any being sent via express mail should be sent to DEA Headquarters, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/ODL, 2401 Jefferson Davis Highway, Alexandria, Virginia 22301; and must be filed no later than November 20, 2006. This procedure is to be conducted simultaneously with and independent of the procedures described in 21 CFR 1301.34(b), (c), (d),
(e)and (f). As noted in a previous notice published in the **Federal Register** on September 23, 1975, (40 FR 43745-46), all applicants for registration to import a basic class of any controlled substance listed in schedule I or II are, and will continue to be required to demonstrate to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, that the requirements for such registration pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 958(a), 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and 21 CFR 1301.34(b), (c), (d),
(e)and
(f)are satisfied. Dated: October 12, 2006. Joseph T. Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration. [FR Doc. E6-17525 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-300P] Assessment of Annual Needs for the List I Chemicals Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine for 2007: Proposed AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Justice. ACTION: Notice of proposed year 2007 assessment of annual needs. SUMMARY: This notice proposes initial year 2007 assessment of annual needs for certain List I chemicals in accordance with the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005 (CMEA), enacted on March 9, 2006. The Act required DEA to establish production quotas and import quotas for ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine. This effort was done in order to prevent the illicit use of these three chemicals in the clandestine manufacture of methamphetamine. The enactment of the CMEA places additional regulatory controls upon the manufacture, distribution, importation and exportation of the three List I chemicals. DATES: Comments or objections must be received on or before December 4, 2006. ADDRESSES: To ensure proper handling of comments, please reference “Docket No. DEA-300P” on all written and electronic correspondence. Written comments being sent via regular mail should be sent to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, Washington, DC 20537, Attention: DEA **Federal Register** Representative/ODL. Written comments sent via express mail should be sent to DEA Headquarters, Attention: DEA **Federal Register** Representative/ODL, 2401 Jefferson Davis Highway, Alexandria, VA 22301. Comments may be directly sent to DEA electronically by sending an electronic message to *dea.diversion.policy@usdoj.gov* . DEA will accept attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word, WordPerfect, Adobe PDF, or Excel file formats only. DEA will not accept any file format other than those specifically listed here. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Sannerud, PhD, Chief, Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Drug Enforcement Administration, Washington, DC 20537, by e-mail, *ode@dea.usdoj.gov* or by fax,
(202)353-1263. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 713 of the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005 (Title VII of Pub. L. 109-177)
(CMEA)amended section 306 of the Controlled Substances Act
(CSA)(Title 21 United States Code (U.S.C.) § 826 “Production quotas for controlled substances”) by adding ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine to existing language to read as follows: “The Attorney General shall determine the total quantity and establish production quotas for each basic class of controlled substance in schedules I and II and for ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine to be manufactured each calendar year to provide for the estimated medical, scientific, research, and industrial needs of the United States, for lawful export requirements, and for the establishment and maintenance of reserve stocks.” Further, § 715 of CMEA amended 21 U.S.C. § 952 “Importation of controlled substances” by adding the same List I chemicals to the existing language in paragraph (a), and by adding a new paragraph
(d)to read as follows:
(a)Controlled substances in schedule I or II and narcotic drugs in schedule III, IV, or V; exceptions: It shall be unlawful to import into the customs territory of the United States from any place outside thereof (but within the United States), or to import into the United States from any place outside thereof, any controlled substance in schedule I or II of subchapter I of this chapter, or any narcotic drug in schedule III, IV, or V of subchapter I of this chapter, or ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine, except that—
(1)such amounts of crude opium, poppy straw, concentrate of poppy straw, and coca leaves, and of ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine, as the Attorney General finds to be necessary to provide for medical, scientific, or other legitimate purposes, and * * * (d)(1) With respect to a registrant under section 958 who is authorized under subsection (a)(1) to import ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine, at any time during the year the registrant may apply for an increase in the amount of such chemical that the registrant is authorized to import, and the Attorney General may approve the application if the Attorney General determines that the approval is necessary to provide for medical, scientific, or other legitimate purposes regarding the chemical. Note: This excerpt of the amendment is published for the convenience of the reader. The official text is published at 21 U.S.C. 952(a) and (d)(1). The responsibility for establishing the assessment of annual needs has been delegated to the Administrator of the DEA by § 0.100 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The Administrator, in turn, has redelegated this function to the Deputy Administrator, pursuant to the Code of Federal Regulations Title 28 § 0.104. The proposed year 2007 assessment of annual needs represents those quantities of ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine which may be manufactured domestically and/or imported into the United States to provide adequate supplies of each substance for: The estimated medical, scientific, research, and industrial needs of the United States; lawful export requirements; and the establishment and maintenance of reserve stocks. Calculation of the Assessment: Medical Needs of the United States for Ephedrine and Pseudoephedrine Since the manufacture and importation of ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine have not been previously regulated through the establishment of an assessment of annual needs, the Drug Enforcement Administration obtained assistance from a private independent contractor, IMS Health Government Solutions (IMS), to develop the proposed initial estimate of the medical needs of the United States of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine. IMS' estimates of medical needs for ephedrine and pseudoephedrine were derived from 2005 data that the company routinely collects and offers to customers in order to understand the pharmaceutical market. For this analysis, IMS utilized the following types of data:
(1)Sales to retail establishments (including pharmacies),
(2)sales by retail establishments to patients, and
(3)medical insurance claims. IMS' estimates of medical needs were intended to encompass only those products containing either ephedrine or pseudoephedrine, whether requiring a prescription or available over-the-counter (OTC). Its estimates of use encompassed those products containing ephedrine and pseudoephedrine which are lawfully marketed under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Although no direct estimates for the assessment of annual needs are currently available, IMS utilized information from a variety of data sources to develop three independent measures (as described in the next paragraph). After each of the three independent measures were calculated for ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, IMS then took a weighted average of the three individual estimates in order to derive its final estimate which was then considered by DEA. The weighted average was determined based on IMS' confidence in each individual estimate such that estimates with less confidence were given less weight. The first estimate was based upon product sales to retail outlets, from IMS' National Sales Perspective
(NSP)service. This estimate was supplemented with information from: IMS' Drug Distribution Database
(DDD)and National Prescription Audit (NPA), ACNielsen's Scantrack
(ST)and Homescan
(HS)services. The second estimate was based upon product sales to customers, from NPA, ST, and HS services, supplemented with information from DDD and NSP services. The third estimate was based upon patient prescription claims data from IMS' ReferencePoint
(RP)database, supplemented with information from United States Census Bureau population estimates and IMS' National Disease and Therapeutic Index (NDTI), NSP, DDD, ST, and HS services. A copy of the IMS report may be obtained from DEA Diversion Web site at: *http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov* . Based on the IMS report, DEA concluded that 3,800 kg of ephedrine and 350,700 kg of pseudoephedrine were required to meet the medical needs of the United States. Calculation of the Assessment: Medical Needs of the United States for Phenylpropanolamine DEA did not request that IMS determine the medical needs for phenylpropanolamine. In November 2000, the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)issued a public health warning for phenylpropanolamine and requested that all drug companies discontinue marketing products containing phenylpropanolamine due to the drug's association with risk for hemorrhagic stroke. In response to the FDA's warning, many companies voluntarily reformulated their products to exclude phenylpropanolamine. Subsequently, on December 22, 2005, FDA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (70 FR 75988) to reclassify all over-the-counter nasal decongestants and weight control drug products containing phenylpropanolamine preparations from their previously proposed monograph status (Category 1) to nonmonograph (Category II). FDA concluded that drug products containing phenylpropanolamine cannot be generally recognized as safe and should no longer be available for over-the-counter use in humans. Therefore, for purposes of calculating the medical needs of the United States for phenylpropanolamine, DEA considered the drug's use in veterinary products only. DEA obtained from the FDA a list of all companies that manufacture veterinary products containing phenylpropanolamine. DEA contacted each company and requested information relating to sales of their phenylpropanolamine-containing products. Based on this review, DEA concluded that 4,354 kg were required to meet the medical needs of the United States. Calculation of the Assessment: Industrial Needs, Export and Inventory Requirements After DEA considered the medical needs for ephedrine, pseudoephedrine and phenylpropanolamine (veterinary products), it then considered:
(1)Industrial needs of the United States,
(2)lawful export requirements, and
(3)maintenance of reserve stocks to determine the assessment of annual needs for ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine. In consideration of the industrial needs of the United States for these three chemicals, DEA considered the use of ephedrine for the domestic manufacture of pseudoephedrine in 2005 and the amount of phenylpropanolamine used for the domestic manufacture of amphetamine in 2005. In consideration of the requirements for lawful export purposes for these three chemicals, DEA considered total 2005 exports as provided on the DEA-Form 486 entitled “Import/Export Declaration—Precursors and Essential Chemicals.” Exports reported on the DEA-486 were as follows: List I chemicals 2005 export quantity
(kg)Ephedrine 2,540 Pseudoephedrine 90,260 Phenylpropanolamine 320 In consideration of the amounts required for the maintenance of reserve stocks, DEA considered 20% of the estimated medical and industrial requirements. Based on this information, the Deputy Administrator hereby proposes that the year 2007 assessment of annual needs for the following List I chemicals, expressed in kilograms of anhydrous base or acid, be established as follows: List I chemicals Proposed year 2007 quotas
(kg)Ephedrine (for sale) 7,100 kg Ephedrine (for conversion) 128,760 kg Pseudoephedrine (for sale) 511,100 kg Phenylpropanolamine (for sale) 5,545 kg Phenylpropanolamine (for conversion) 6,240 kg Ephedrine (for conversion) refers to the industrial use of ephedrine, i.e., that which will be converted to pseudoephedrine. Phenylpropanolamine (for conversion) refers to the industrial use of phenylpropanolamine, *i.e.* , that which will be converted to amphetamine by the pharmaceutical industry. The “for sale” quotas refer to the amount of ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine used for purposes outside of the above-mentioned conversions. All interested persons are invited to submit their comments in writing or electronically regarding this proposal following the procedures in the ADDRESSES section of this document. A person may object to or comment on the proposal relating to any of the above-mentioned chemicals without filing comments or objections regarding the others. If a person believes that one or more of these issues warrant a hearing, the individual should so state and summarize the reasons for this belief. In the event that comments or objections to this proposal raise one or more issues which the Deputy Administrator finds warrant a hearing, the Deputy Administrator shall order a public hearing by notice in the **Federal Register** , summarizing the issues to be heard and setting the time for the hearing. The Office of Management and Budget has determined that notices of quotas are not subject to centralized review under Executive Order 12866. This action does not preempt or modify any provision of State law; nor does it impose enforcement responsibilities on any State; nor does it diminish the power of any State to enforce its own laws. Accordingly, this action does not have any federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Order 13132. The Deputy Administrator hereby certifies that this action will have no significant impact upon small entities whose interests must be considered under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* The establishment of quotas for ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine is mandated by law. The quotas are necessary to provide for the estimated medical, scientific, research and industrial needs of the United States, for export requirements and the establishment and maintenance of reserve stocks. While quotas are of primary importance to large manufacturers, their impact upon small entities is neither negative nor beneficial. Accordingly, the Deputy Administrator has determined that this action does not require a regulatory flexibility analysis. This action meets the applicable standards set forth in §§ 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 Civil Justice Reform. This action will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $118,000,000 or more in any one year, and will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. This action is not a major rule as defined by § 804 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Congressional Review Act). This action will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign-based companies in domestic and export markets. Dated: October 13, 2006. Michele M. Leonhart, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. E6-17526 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-270F] Controlled Substances: Final Revised Aggregate Production Quotas for 2006 AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), U.S. Department of Justice. ACTION: Notice of final aggregate production quotas for 2006. SUMMARY: This notice establishes final 2006 aggregate production quotas for controlled substances in Schedules I and II of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (CSA). The DEA has taken into consideration comments received in response to a notice of the proposed revised aggregate production quotas for 2006 published July 5, 2006 (71 FR 38174). EFFECTIVE DATE: October 19, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Sannerud, PhD, Chief, Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Drug Enforcement Administration, Washington, DC 20537, Telephone:
(202)307-7183. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 306 of the CSA (Title 21 United States Code (U.S.C. 826) requires that the Attorney General establish aggregate production quotas for each basic class of controlled substance listed in Schedules I and II. This responsibility has been delegated to the Administrator of the DEA by 28 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR)0.100. The Administrator, in turn, has redelegated this function to the Deputy Administrator, pursuant to 28 CFR 0.104. The 2006 aggregate production quotas represent those quantities of controlled substances in Schedules I and II that may be produced in the United States in 2006 to provide adequate supplies of each substance for: the estimated medical, scientific, research and industrial needs of the United States; lawful export requirements; and the establishment and maintenance of reserve stocks (21 U.S.C. 826(a) and 21 CFR 1303.11). These quotas do not include imports of controlled substances. On July 5, 2006, a notice of the proposed revised 2006 aggregate production quotas for certain controlled substances in Schedules I and II was published in the **Federal Register** (71 FR 38174). All interested persons were invited to comment on or object to these proposed aggregate production quotas on or before July 26, 2006. Eight companies commented on a total of 22 Schedules I and II controlled substances within the published comment period. Eight companies proposed that the aggregate production quotas for alfentanil, amphetamine, codeine (for conversion), dihydrocodeine, dihydromorphine, diphenoxylate, fentanyl, gamma hydroxybutyric acid, hydrocodone, hydromorphinol, hydromorphone, methadone, methylphenidate, morphine (for conversion), N,N-dimethylamphetamine, opium, oxycodone, oxycodone (for conversion), oxymorphone, oxymorphone (for conversion), tetrahydrocannabinols, and thebaine were insufficient to provide for the estimated medical, scientific, research, and industrial needs of the United States, for export requirements and for the establishment and maintenance of reserve stocks. DEA has taken into consideration the above comments along with the relevant 2005 year-end inventories, initial 2006 manufacturing quotas, 2006 export requirements, actual and projected 2006 sales, research, product development requirements and additional applications received. Based on this information, the DEA has adjusted the final 2006 aggregate production quotas for alfentanil, codeine (for conversion), dextropropoxyphene, dihydromorphine, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, morphine (for conversion), N,N-dimethylamphetamine, opium, oxycodone, oxycodone (for conversion), oxymorphone, oxymorphone (for conversion), tetrahydrocannabinols, and thebaine to meet the legitimate needs of the United States. Regarding amphetamine, dihydrocodeine, diphenoxylate, fentanyl, gamma hydroxybutyric acid, hydromorphinol, methadone, and methylphenidate, the DEA has determined that the proposed revised 2006 aggregate production quotas are sufficient to meet the current 2006 estimated medical, scientific, research, and industrial needs of the United States and to provide for adequate inventories. Therefore, under the authority vested in the Attorney General by Section 306 of the CSA (21 U.S.C. 826), and delegated to the Administrator of the DEA by 28 CFR 0.100, and redelegated to the Deputy Administrator, pursuant to 28 CFR 0.104, the Deputy Administrator hereby orders that the 2006 final aggregate production quotas for the following controlled substances, expressed in grams of anhydrous acid or base, be established as follows: Basic class—schedule I Final revised 2006 quotas 2,5-Dimethoxyamphetamine 2,801,000 g 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine
(DOET)2 g 3-Methylfentanyl 2 g 3-Methylthiofentanyl 2 g 3,4-Methylenedioxyamphetamine
(MDA)20 g 3,4-Methylenedioxy-N-ethylamphetamine
(MDEA)10 g 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine
(MDMA)22 g 3,4,5-Trimethoxyamphetamine 2 g 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine
(DOB)2 g 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine (2-CB) 2 g 4-Methoxyamphetamine 77 g g 4-Methylaminorex 2 g 4-Methyl-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine
(DOM)12 g 5-Methoxy-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine 2 g Acetyl-alpha-methylfentanyl 2 g Acetyldihydrocodeine 2 g Acetylmethadol 2 g Allylprodine 2 g Alphacetylmethadol 2 g Alpha-ethyltryptamine 2 g Alphameprodine 2 g Alphamethadol 3 g Alpha-methylfentanyl 2 g Alpha-methylthiofentanyl 2 g Aminorex 2 g Benzylmorphine 2 g Betacetylmethadol 2 g Beta-hydroxy-3-methylfentanyl 2 g Beta-hydroxyfentanyl 2 g Betameprodine 2 g Betamethadol 2 g Betaprodine 2 g Bufotenine 5 g Cathinone 3 g Codeine-N-oxide 302 g Diethyltryptamine 2 g Difenoxin 5,000 g Dihydromorphine 2,449,000 g Dimethyltryptamine 3 g Gamma-hydroxybutyric acid 8,000,000 g Heroin 5 g Hydromorphinol 2 g Hydroxypethidine 2 g Lysergic acid diethylamide
(LSD)61 g Marihuana 4,500,000 g Mescaline 2 g Methaqualone 10 g Methcathinone 4 g Methyldihydromorphine 2 g Morphine-N-oxide 310 g N,N-Dimethylamphetamine 7 g N-Ethylamphetamine 2 g N-Hydroxy-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine 2 g Noracymethadol 2 g Norlevorphanol 52 g Normethadone 2 g Normorphine 16 g Para-fluorofentanyl 2 g Phenomorphan 2 g Pholcodine 2 g Psilocybin 7 g Psilocyn 7 g Tetrahydrocannabinols 338,000 g Thiofentanyl 2 g Trimeperidine 2 g Basic class—schedule II Final revised 2006 quotas 1-Phenylcyclohexylamine 2 g Alfentanil 7,200 g Alphaprodine 2 g Amobarbital 101,000 g Amphetamine 17,000,000 g Cocaine 286,000 g Codeine (for sale) 39,605,000 g Codeine (for conversion) 59,000,000 g Dextropropoxyphene 120,000,000 g Dihydrocodeine 1,261,000 g Diphenoxylate 828,000 g Ecgonine 83,000 g Ethylmorphine 2 g Fentanyl 1,428,000 g Glutethimide 2 g Hydrocodone (for sale) 42,000,000 g Hydrocodone (for conversion) 1,500,000 g Hydromorphone 2,500,000 g Isomethadone 2 g Levo-alphacetylmethadol
(LAAM)6 g Levomethorphan 5 g Levorphanol 5,000 g Meperidine 9,753,000 g Metazocine 1 g Methadone (for sale) 25,000,000 g Methadone Intermediate 26,000,000 g Methamphetamine 3,130,000 g [680,000 grams of levo-desoxyephedrine for use in a non-controlled, non prescription product; 2,405,000 grams for methamphetamine mostly for conversion to a Schedule III product; and 45,000 grams for methamphetamine (for sale)] Methylphenidate 35,000,000 g Morphine (for sale) 35,000,000 g Morphine (for conversion) 100,000,000 g Nabilone 2 g Noroxymorphone (for sale) 1,002 g Noroxymorphone (for conversion) 5,600,000 g Opium 1,360,000 g Oxycodone (for sale) 56,000,000 g Oxycodone (for conversion) 4,610,000 g Oxymorphone 806,000 g Oxymorphone (for conversion) 2,400,000 g Pentobarbital 28,000,000 g Phencyclidine 2,021 g Phenmetrazine 2 g Racemethorphan 2 g Remifentanil 2,700 g Secobarbital 2 g Sufentanil 6,500 g Thebaine 78,000,000 g The Deputy Administrator further orders that the aggregate production quotas for all other Schedules I and II controlled substances included in 21 CFR 1308.11 and 1308.12 shall be zero. The Office of Management and Budget has determined that notices of aggregate production quotas are not subject to centralized review under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866. This action does not preempt or modify any provision of State law; nor does it impose enforcement responsibilities on any State; nor does it diminish the power of any State to enforce its own laws. Accordingly, this action does not have federalism implications warranting the application of E.O. 13132. The Deputy Administrator hereby certifies that this action will have no significant impact upon small entities whose interests must be considered under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* The establishment of aggregate production quotas for Schedules I and II controlled substances is mandated by law and by international treaty obligations. The quotas are necessary to provide for the estimated medical, scientific, research, and industrial needs of the United States, for export requirements and the establishment and maintenance of reserve stocks. While aggregate production quotas are of primary importance to large manufacturers, their impact upon small entities is neither negative nor beneficial. Accordingly, the Deputy Administrator has determined that this action does not require a regulatory flexibility analysis. This action meets the applicable standards set forth in Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988 Civil Justice Reform. This action will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $118,000,000 or more in any one year, and will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. This action is not a major rule as defined by Section 804 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This action will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign-based companies in domestic and export markets. Dated: October 13, 2006. Michele M. Leonhart, Deputy Administrator. 1 [FR Doc. E6-17524 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-255] Nuclear Management Company, LLC, Palisades Nuclear Plant; Notice of Availability of the Final Supplement 27 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Regarding the License Renewal of Palisades Nuclear Plant Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, Commission) has published a final plant-specific supplement to the “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants” (GEIS), NUREG-1437, regarding the renewal of operating license DPR-20 for the Palisades Nuclear Plant (Palisades) for an additional 20 years of operation. Palisades is located on the eastern shore of Lake Michigan in Covert Township on the western side of Van Buren County, Michigan, approximately 4.5 miles south of the city limits of South Haven, Michigan. Possible alternatives to the proposed action (license renewal) include no action and reasonable alternative energy sources. As discussed in Section 9.3 of the final Supplement 27, based on:
(1)The analysis and findings in the GEIS;
(2)the Environmental Report submitted by Nuclear Management Company, LLC;
(3)consultation with Federal, State, and local agencies;
(4)the staff's own independent review; and
(5)the staff's consideration of public comments, the recommendation of the staff is that the Commission determine that the adverse environmental impacts of license renewal for Palisades are not so great that preserving the option of license renewal for energy-planning decision makers would be unreasonable. The final Supplement 27 to the GEIS is publicly available at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, or from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room is accessible at *http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm* . The Accession Number for the final Supplement 27 to the GEIS is ML062710300. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC's PDR reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail at *pdr@nrc.gov* . In addition, the South Haven Memorial Library, 314 Broadway Street, South Haven, Michigan, has agreed to make the final supplement 27 to the GEIS available for public inspection. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Mr. Bo M. Pham, Environmental Branch B, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 20555-0001. Mr. Pham may be contacted by telephone at 1-800-368-5642, extension 8450 or via e-mail at *PalisadesEIS@nrc.gov* . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of October, 2006. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Bo M. Pham, Acting Branch Chief, Environmental Branch B, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E6-17435 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting Notice In accordance with the purposes of sections 29 and 182b. of the Atomic Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039, 2232b), the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
(ACRS)will hold a meeting on November 1-3, 2006, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The date of this meeting was previously published in the **Federal Register** on Tuesday, November 22, 2005 (70 FR 70638). Wednesday, November 1, 2006, Conference Room T-2B3, Two White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland *8:30 a.m.-8:35 a.m.: Opening Remarks by the ACRS Chairman* (Open)—The ACRS Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting. *8:35 a.m.-10 a.m.: Final Review of the License Renewal Application for the Palisades Nuclear Plant* (Open)—The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and the Nuclear Management Company, LLC regarding the license renewal application for the Palisades Nuclear Plant and the associated NRC staff's final Safety Evaluation Report. *10:15 a.m.-11:45 a.m.: Proposed Revisions to Regulatory Guide 1.189, “Fire Protection for Operating Nuclear Power Plants”* (Open)—The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding proposed revisions to Regulatory Guide 1.189, and related matters. *1:30 p.m.-3:30 p.m.: Draft Final Rule to Risk-Inform 10 CFR 50.46, “Acceptance Criteria for Emergency Core Cooling Systems for Light-Water Nuclear Power Reactors”* (Open)—The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the draft final rule to risk-inform 10 CFR 50.46, and related matters. *3:45 p.m.-4:45 p.m.: Proposed Revisions to Regulatory Guides and Standard Review Plan
(SRP)Sections in Support of New Reactor Licensing* (Open)—The Committee will discuss the proposed revisions to Regulatory Guides and SRP Sections that are being made in support of new reactor licensing. *5 p.m.-7 p.m.: Preparation of ACRS Reports* (Open)—The Committee will discuss proposed ACRS reports on matters considered during this meeting. Thursday, November 2, 2006, Conference Room T-2B3, Two White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland *8:30 a.m.-8:35 a.m.: Opening Remarks by the ACRS Chairman* (Open)—The ACRS Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting. *8:35 a.m.-10 a.m.: Potential Collaborative Research on Human Reliability Analysis Methods* (Open)—The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding potential collaborative research on human reliability analysis methods. *10:15 a.m.-11:15 a.m.: Future ACRS Activities/Report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee* (Open)—The Committee will discuss the recommendations of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee regarding items proposed for consideration by the full Committee during future meetings. Also, it will hear a report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee on matters related to the conduct of ACRS business, including anticipated workload and member assignments. * 11:15 a.m.-11:30 a.m.: Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations * (Open)—The Committee will discuss the responses from the NRC Executive Director for Operations to comments and recommendations included in recent ACRS reports and letters. *12:30 p.m.-6:30 p.m.: Preparation of ACRS Reports* (Open)—The Committee will discuss proposed ACRS reports. Friday, November 3, 2006, Conference Room T-2B3, Two White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland *8:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.: Preparation of ACRS Reports* (Open)—The Committee will continue discussion of proposed ACRS reports. *12:30 p.m.-1 p.m.: Miscellaneous* (Open)—The Committee will discuss matters related to the conduct of Committee activities and matters and specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings, as time and availability of information permit. Procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the **Federal Register** on October 2, 2006 (71 FR 58015). In accordance with those procedures, oral or written views may be presented by members of the public, including representatives of the nuclear industry. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during the open portions of the meeting. Persons desiring to make oral statements should notify the Cognizant ACRS staff named below five days before the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made to allow necessary time during the meeting for such statements. Use of still, motion picture, and television cameras during the meeting may be limited to selected portions of the meeting as determined by the Chairman. Information regarding the time to be set aside for this purpose may be obtained by contacting the Cognizant ACRS staff prior to the meeting. In view of the possibility that the schedule for ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend should check with the Cognizant ACRS staff if such rescheduling would result in major inconvenience. Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, as well as the Chairman's ruling on requests for the opportunity to present oral statements and the time allotted therefor can be obtained by contacting Mr. Sam Duraiswamy, Cognizant ACRS staff (301-415-7364), between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., (ET). ACRS meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room at *pdr@nrc.gov* , or by calling the PDR at 1-800-397-4209, or from the Publicly Available Records System
(PARS)component of NRC's document system (ADAMS) which is accessible from the NRC Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html* or * http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/* (ACRS & ACNW Mtg schedules/agendas). Videoteleconferencing service is available for observing open sessions of ACRS meetings. Those wishing to use this service for observing ACRS meetings should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACRS Audio Visual Technician (301-415-8066), between 7:30 a.m. and 3:45 p.m., (ET), at least 10 days before the meeting to ensure the availability of this service. Individuals or organizations requesting this service will be responsible for telephone line charges and for providing the equipment and facilities that they use to establish the videoteleconferencing link. The availability of videoteleconferencing services is not guaranteed. Dated: October 13, 2006. Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E6-17433 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee Meeting on Regulatory Policies and Practices; Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittee on Regulatory Policies and Practices will hold a meeting on October 31, 2006, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: *Tuesday, October 31, 2006—8:30 a.m. until 12:30 p.m.* The Subcommittee will review the details of the draft final rule 10 CFR 50.46, “Acceptance Criteria for Emergency Core Cooling Systems for Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants.” The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff, and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Eric A. Thornsbury (telephone 301/415-8716), five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted. Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. Dated: October 12, 2006. Michael R. Snodderly, Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW. [FR Doc. E6-17436 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Subcommittee Meeting on Fire Protection; Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittee on Fire Protection will hold a meeting on October 31, 2006, Room T—2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Tuesday, October 31, 2006-1:30 p.m. Until the Conclusion of Business The purpose of this meeting is to review Regulatory Guide 1.189, “Fire Protection for Operating Nuclear Power Plants,” and associated SRP Section 9.5.1, “Fire Protection Program.” The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with the NRC staff, and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Michael A. Junge (Telephone: 301-415-6855) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted. Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 6:45 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. Dated: October 12, 2006. Michael R. Snodderly, Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW. [FR Doc. E6-17437 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Subcommittee Meeting on Planning and Procedures; Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures will hold a meeting on November 1, 2006, Room T-2B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b ( c)(2) and
(6)to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of the ACRS, and information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Wednesday, November 1, 2006, 12 Noon-1:15 p.m. The Subcommittee will discuss proposed ACRS activities and related matters. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Sam Duraiswamy (telephone: 301-415-7364) between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m.
(ET)five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes in the agenda. Dated: October 11, 2006. Michael R. Snodderly, Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW. [FR Doc. E6-17438 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE [Docket No. WTO/DS285] WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding United States—Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Notice; request for comments. SUMMARY: The Office of the United States Trade Representative (“USTR”) is providing notice that the World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), at the request of Antigua and Barbuda, has established a panel under Article 21.5 of the WTO *Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes* (“DSU”) to examine the compliance of the United States with the DSB recommendations and rulings in the matter of *United States—Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services* . The panel request may be found at *www.wto.org* in a document designated as WT/DS285/18. USTR invites written comments from the public concerning the issues raised in this dispute. DATES: Although USTR will accept any comments received during the course of the dispute settlement proceedings, comments should be submitted on or before October 23 to be assured of timely consideration by USTR. ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted
(i)electronically, to *FR0701@ustr.eop.gov, Attn:* “Gambling and Betting Dispute (DS285)” in the subject line, or
(ii)by fax, to Sandy McKinzy at
(202)395-3640. For documents sent by fax, USTR requests that the submitter provide a confirmation copy to the electronic mail address listed above. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Busis, Associate General Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508,
(202)395-3150. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Prior WTO Proceedings On June 12, 2003, Antigua and Barbuda requested a dispute settlement panel to consider its claims that U.S. Federal, State and territorial laws on gambling violate U.S. commitments under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), to the extent that such laws prevent or can prevent operators from Antigua and Barbuda from lawfully offering gambling and betting services in the United States. The WTO ruled on April 20, 2005, rejecting all of Antigua and Barbuda's claims except the WTO ruled that for the United States to show that the Federal gambling laws meet the requirements of the chapeau to Article XIV of the GATS, the United States needed to clarify an issue concerning Internet gambling on horse racing. On May 19, 2005, the United States stated its intention to implement the DSB recommendations and rulings. On April 10, 2006, the United States informed the DSB that the United States had complied with the DSB recommendations and rulings. Issues Raised by Antigua and Barbuda In its panel request under Article 21.5 of the DSU, Antigua disputes that the United States has complied with the DSB recommendations and rulings. Antigua raises the following issues:
(1)Antigua and Barbuda argues that the United States has not taken any measure to comply with the DSB recommendations and rulings.
(2)Second, Antigua and Barbuda characterizes U.S. compliance as relying on a “restatement of a legal position taken by a party to a dispute,” and argues that such action is legally insufficient under the DSU to amount to compliance.
(3)Third, Antigua and Barbuda disputes that the U.S. compliance brings the measures at issue within the scope of the GATS Article XIV public morals/public order exception. Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning the issues raised in this dispute. Persons may submit their comments either
(i)electronically, to *FR0701@ustr.eop.gov, Attn:* “Gambling and Betting Dispute (DS285)” in the subject line, or
(ii)by fax to Sandy McKinzy at
(202)395-3640. For documents sent by fax, USTR requests that the submitter provide a confirmation copy to the electronic mail address listed above. USTR encourages the submission of documents in Adobe PDF format, as attachments to an electronic mail. Interested persons who make submissions by electronic mail should not provide separate cover letters; information that might appear in a cover letter should be included in the submission itself. Similarly, to the extent possible, any attachments to the submission should be included in the same file as the submission itself, and not as separate files. A person requesting that information contained in a comment submitted by that person be treated as confidential business information must certify that such information is business confidential and would not customarily be released to the public by the submitter. Confidential business information must be clearly designated as such and the submission must be marked “Business Confidential” at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page. Information or advice contained in a comment submitted, other than business confidential information, may be determined by USTR to be confidential in accordance with section 135(g)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155(g)(2)). If the submitter believes that information or advice may qualify as such, the submitter—
(1)Must clearly so designate the information or advice;
(2)Must clearly mark the material as “Submitted in Confidence” at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page; and
(3)Is encouraged to provide a non-confidential summary of the information or advice. Pursuant to section 127(e) of the URAA (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR will maintain a file on this dispute settlement proceeding, accessible to the public, in the USTR Reading Room, which is located at 1724 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508. The public file will include non-confidential comments received by USTR from the public with respect to the dispute; and the U.S. submissions, the submissions, or non-confidential summaries of submissions, received from other participants in the dispute; the report of the panel and; if applicable, the report of the Appellate Body. An appointment to review the public file (Docket No. WT/DS285, Gambling and Betting Dispute) may be made by calling the USTR Reading Room at
(202)395-6186. The USTR Reading Room is open to the public from 9:30 a.m. to noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Daniel E. Brinza, Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and Enforcement. [FR Doc. E6-17527 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190-W7-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. Regulation SHO; SEC File No. 270-534; OMB Control No. 3235-0589. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ) the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. Regulation SHO Proposed Regulation SHO, Rule 201 (17 CFR 242.200 through 242.203) requires each broker-dealer that effects a sell order in any equity security to mark the order “long,” short,” or “short exempt.” Proposed Regulation SHO, Rule 201 causes a collection of information because the rule's requirement that each order ticket be marked either “long,” “short,” or “short exempt” is a disclosure to third parties and the public imposed on ten or more persons. The information required by the rule is necessary for the execution of the Commission's mandate under the Exchange Act to prevent fraudulent, manipulative, and deceptive acts and practices by broker-dealers. The purpose of the information collected is to enable regulators to monitor whether a person effecting a short sale is acting in accordance with proposed Regulation SHO. Without the requirement that each order or an equity security be marked either “long,” “short,” or “short exempt,” there would be no means to police compliance with Regulation SHO. We assume that all of the approximately 6,752 registered broker-dealers effect sell orders in securities covered by proposed Regulation SHO. For purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Commission staff has estimated that a total of 1,164,755,007 trades are executed annually. This is an average of approximately 172,505 annual responses by each respondent. Each response of marking orders “long,” “short,” or “short exempt” takes approximately .000139 hours (.5 seconds) to complete. Thus, the total approximate estimated annual hour burden per year is 161,900 burden hours (1,164,755,007 responses @ 0.000139 hours/response). A reasonable estimate for the paperwork compliance for the proposed rules for each broker-dealer is approximately 24 burden hours (172,505 responses @ .000139 hours/response) or (161,900 burden hours / 6,752 respondents). The retention period for the recordkeeping requirement under Regulation SHO is three years following the trade date. The recordkeeping requirement under this Rule is mandatory to assist the Commission with monitoring the short sales of securities. This rule does not involve the collection of confidential information. Please note that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Comments should be directed to:
(i)Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or by sending an e-mail to: *David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov;* and
(ii)R. Corey Booth, Director/CIO, Office of Information Technology, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an e-mail to: *PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov.* Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice. Dated: October 10, 2006. Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17397 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54593; File No. SR-Amex-2006-97] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Electronic Access Fee October 12, 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 October 4, 2006, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. Amex filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend Amex's Member Fee Schedule to reduce the Electronic Access Fee from $61,363 to $30,000. The text of the proposed rule change is available on Amex's Web site at *http://www.amex.com,* at the principal office of Amex, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, Amex included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. Amex has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of this proposal is to amend Amex's Member Fee Schedule to reduce the Electronic Access Fee from $61,363 to $30,000. Amex currently charges a $61,363 electronic access fee (“Fee”) to Associate member firms 5 which route order flow to the Exchange. Eleven out of the 42 Associate member firms currently registered with Amex pay the Fee each year. 6 5 An Associate member firm is not required to own or lease a seat to qualify as a member firm. 6 The Fee is billed once a year in the fall for the upcoming fiscal year. All new Associate members were required to pay the Fee when it was established in August of 2000. 7 The Exchange proposes to revise the Fee to reflect the current prices of seats and the prices to lease a seat. The fee change will not affect the value of the regular seats. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43279 (September 11, 2000), 65 FR 56606 (September 19, 2000) (approving File No. SR-Amex-2000-44); *see also* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44337 (May 22, 2001), 66 FR 29369 (May 30, 2001) (approving File No. SR-Amex-2001-15). Of the 42 current Associate member firms, only two have been approved since August 2000, subjecting them to payment of the Fee. Furthermore, the number of Associate member firms with electronic access capability has significantly decreased over the past few years as such firms either terminate or change their status to an off-floor, regular membership. The Exchange believes that the new reduced Fee will not undermine other Amex member firms and will appeal to regional firms interested in sending order flow to Amex, without the need for a physical presence at the Exchange. The Exchange asserts that the proposal is equitable as required by Section 6(b)(4) of the Act. 2. Statutory Basis Amex believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 8 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 9 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 exchange facilities. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition. 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 establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge applicable only to a member imposed by the Exchange, and, therefore, has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 10 and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder. 11 At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 11 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-Amex-2006-97 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC, 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2006-97. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of Amex. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2006-97 and should be submitted on or before November 9, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). J. Lynn Taylor, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17392 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54595; File No. SR-Amex-2006-78] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to Generic Listing Standards for Series of Portfolio Depositary Receipts and Index Fund Shares Based On International or Global Indexes October 12, 2006. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on August 18, 2006, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. On October 12, 2006, submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposal. 3 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240. 19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1, Amex revised the proposed rule text and clarified certain aspects of its proposal. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to revise Amex Rules 1000 and 1000A to include generic listing standards for series of portfolio depositary receipts (“PDRs”) and index fund shares (“IFSs”) that are based on international or global indexes or on indexes. Additionally, the Exchange proposes to revise Amex Rules 1000 and 1000A to include generic listing standards for PDRs and IFSs that are based on indexes or portfolios previously approved by the Commission as an underlying benchmark for the trading of PDRs, IFSs, options or other specified index-based securities. The Amex also proposes to make minor changes to Amex Rules 1000, 1002, 1000A and 1002A. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Amex's Web site ( *http://www.amex.com* ), at Amex's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. The text of Exhibit 5 to the proposed rule change is also available on the Commission's Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). 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 Amex included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Amex has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange proposes to revise Commentary .03 to Rule 1000 and Commentary .02 to Rule 1000A to include generic listing standards for series of PDRs and IFSs (PDRs and IFSs together referred to as “exchange-traded funds” or “ETFs”) that are based on international or global indexes, or on indexes previously approved by the Commission under Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act for the trading of ETFs, options or other index-based securities. This proposal will enable the Exchange to list and trade exchange-traded funds pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) 4 of the Exchange Act if each of the conditions set forth in Commentary .03 to Rule 1000 or Commentary .02 to Rule 1000A is satisfied. Rule 19b-4(e) provides that the listing and trading of a new derivative securities product by a self-regulatory organization (“SRO”) shall not be deemed a proposed rule change, pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of Rule 19b-4, if the Commission has approved, pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Exchange Act, the SRO's trading rules, procedures and listing standards for the product class that would include the new derivatives securities product, and the SRO has a surveillance program for the product class. 5 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 5 When relying on Rule 19b-4(e), the SRO must submit Form 19b-4(e) to the Commission within five business days after the SRO begins trading the new derivative securities products. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40761 (December 8, 1998), 63 FR 70952 (December 22, 1998). Exchange-Traded Funds Amex Rules 1000 *et seq.* allow for the listing and trading on the Exchange of PDRs. PDRs represent interests in a unit investment trust registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 6 (“1940 Act”) that operates on an open-end basis and that holds the securities that comprise an index or portfolio. Amex Rules 1000A *et seq.* provide standards for the listing and trading of IFSs, which are securities issued by an open-end management investment company (open-end mutual fund) based on a portfolio of stocks or fixed income securities that seeks to provide investment results that correspond generally to the price and yield performance of a specified foreign or domestic stock index or fixed income securities index. Pursuant to Rules 1000 *et seq.* and 1000A *et seq.* , PDRs and IFSs must be issued in a specified aggregate minimum number in return for a deposit of specified securities and/or a cash amount, with a value equal to the next determined net asset value. When aggregated in the same specified minimum number, PDRs and IFSs must be redeemed by the issuer for the securities and/or cash, with a value equal to the next determined net asset value. The net asset value is calculated once a day after the close of the regular trading day. 6 15 U.S.C. 80a. To meet the investment objective of providing investment returns that correspond to the price, dividend and yield performance of the underlying index, ETFs may use a “replication” strategy or a “representative sampling” strategy with respect to the ETF portfolio. 7 An ETF, using a replication strategy, will invest in each stock found in the underlying index in about the same proportion as that stock is represented in the index itself. An ETF, using a representative sampling strategy, will generally invest in a significant number of the component securities of the underlying index, but it may not invest in all of the component securities of its underlying index and will hold stocks that, in the aggregate, are intended to approximate the full index in terms of key characteristics, such as price/earnings ratio, earnings growth, and dividend yield. 7 In either case, many ETFs, by their terms, may be considered invested in the securities of the underlying index to the extent the ETFs invest in sponsored American Depositary Receipts (“ADRs”), Global Depositary Receipts (“GDRs”), or European Depositary Receipts (“EDRs”) representing securities in the underlying index that trade on an exchange with last sale reporting. In addition, ETF portfolios may be adjusted in accordance with changes in the composition of the underlying indexes or to maintain compliance with requirements applicable to a regulated investment company under the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”). 8 8 In order for an ETF to qualify for tax treatment as a regulated investment company, it must meet several requirements under the IRC. Among these is the requirement that, at the close of each quarter of the ETF's taxable year,
(i)at least 50% of the market value of the ETF's total assets must be represented by cash items, U.S. government securities, securities of other regulated investment companies and other securities, with such other securities limited for purposes of this calculation in respect of any one issuer to an amount not greater than 5% of the value if the ETF's assets and not greater than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of such issuer, and
(ii)not more than 25% of the value of its total assets may be invested in the securities of any one issuer, or two or more issuers that are controlled by the ETF (within the meaning of Section 851 (b)(4)(B) of the IRC) and that are engaged in the same or similar trades or businesses or related trades or business (other than U.S. government securities or the securities of other regulated investment companies). Generic Listing Standards for Exchange-Traded Funds The Exchange notes that the Commission has previously approved generic listing standards pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) 9 of the Exchange Act for ETFs based on indexes that consist of stocks listed on U.S. exchanges. 10 In general, the proposed criteria for the underlying component securities in the international and global indexes are similar to those for the domestic indexes, but with modifications as appropriate for the issues and risks associated with non-U.S. securities. 9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 10 *See* Commentary .03 to Amex Rule 1000 and Commentary .02 to Amex Rule 1000A. *See also* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42787 (May 15, 2000), 65 FR 33598 (May 24, 2000). In addition, the Commission has previously approved the listing and trading of ETFs based on international indexes—those based on non-U.S. component stocks—as well as global indexes—those based on non-U.S. and U.S. component stocks. 11 11 *See* , *e.g.* , Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 50189 (August 12, 2004), 69 FR 51723 (August 20, 2004) (approving the listing and trading of certain Vanguard International Equity Index Funds); 44700 (August 14, 2001), 66 FR 43927 (August 21, 2001) (approving the listing and trading of series of the iShares Trust based on certain S&P global indexes). The Exchange notes that the Commission has also approved listing standards for other index-based derivatives that permit the listing and trading pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) 12 of such securities where the Commission had previously approved the trading of specified index-based derivatives on the same index, on the condition that all of the standards set forth in those orders, in particular with respect to surveillance sharing agreements, continued to be satisfied. 13 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 13 *See Amex Company Guide* Section 107D (Index-Linked Securities), Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51563 (April 15, 2005), 70 FR 21257 (April 25, 2005). In approving ETFs for Exchange trading, the Exchange states that the Commission thoroughly considered the structure of the ETFs, their usefulness to investors and to the markets, and Amex rules that govern their trading. The Exchange believes that adopting additional generic listing standards for these ETFs based on international and global indexes and applying Rule 19b-4(e) 14 should fulfill the intended objective of that Rule by allowing those ETFs that satisfy the proposed generic listing standards to commence trading, without the need for the public comment period and Commission approval. The proposed rules have the potential to reduce the time frame for bringing ETFs to market, thereby reducing the burdens on issuers and other market participants. The failure of a particular ETF to comply with the proposed generic listing standards under Rule 19b-4(e) 15 would not, however, preclude the Exchange from submitting a separate filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(2), 16 requesting Commission approval to list and trade a particular ETF. 14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 15 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). Requirements for Listing and Trading ETFs Based on International and Global Indexes The Exchange states that exchange-traded funds listed pursuant to these generic standards for international and global indexes would be traded, in all other respects, under the Exchange's existing trading rules and procedures that apply to ETFs and would be covered under the Exchange's surveillance program for ETFs. 17 17 *See* Amex Rules 1000 through 1006 and 1000A through 1005A. In order to list a PDR or an IFS pursuant to the proposed generic listing standards for international or global indexes, the index underlying the PDR or IFS must satisfy all the conditions contained in proposed Commentary .03 to Rule 1000 (for PDRs) or proposed Commentary .02 to Rule 1000A (for IFSs). As with the existing generic standards for ETFs based on domestic indexes, the Exchange states that these generic listing standards are intended to ensure that stocks with substantial market capitalization and trading volume account for a substantial portion of the weight of an index or portfolio. While the standards in this proposal are based on the standards contained in the current generic listing standards for ETFs based on domestic indexes, they have been adapted as appropriate to apply to international and global indexes. As proposed, the definition section of each of Rule 1000 and Rule 1000A—section (b)—would be revised to include definitions of US Component Stock and Non-US Component Stock. These new definitions would provide the basis for the standards for indexes with either domestic or international stocks, or a combination of both. A “Non-US Component Stock” would mean an equity security issued by an entity that
(a)is not organized, domiciled or incorporated in the United States;
(b)is not registered under Sections 12(b) or 12(g) of the Exchange Act; and
(c)is an operating company (including Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITS) and income trusts, but excluding investment trusts, unit trusts, mutual funds, and derivatives). This definition is designed to create a category of component stocks that are issued by companies that are not based in the U.S., but that also are not subject to oversight through Commission registration, and would include sponsored GDRs and EDRs. This definition would appear in new subsection
(4)of Rule 1000(b) and new subsection
(5)of Rule 1000A(b). A “US Component Stock” would mean an equity security that is registered under Sections 12(b) or 12(g) of the Exchange Act, which would include an equity security registered under Section 12(b) or 12(g) of the Exchange Act underlying ADRs. Equity securities underlying ADRs that are registered pursuant to the Exchange Act are considered US Component Stocks because the issuers of those securities are subject to Commission jurisdiction and must comply with Commission rules. This definition would appear in new subsection
(3)of Rule 1000(b) and new subsection
(4)of Rule 1000A(b). The Exchange proposes that in order to list a PDR or an IFS based on an international or global index pursuant to the generic standards, the index must meet the following criteria: • Component stocks that in the aggregate account for at least 90% of the weight of the index or portfolio shall have a minimum worldwide market value of at least $100 million (Rule 1000, Commentary .03(a)(B)(1) and Rule 1000A, Commentary .02(a)(B)(1)); • Component stocks representing at least 90% of the weight of the index or portfolio shall have a minimum monthly worldwide trading volume during each of the last six months of at least 250,000 shares (Rule 1000, Commentary .03(a)(B)(2) and Rule 1000A, Commentary .02(a)(B)(2)); • The most heavily weighted component stock may not exceed 25% of the weight of the index or portfolio and the five most heavily weighted component stocks may not exceed 60% of the weight of the index or portfolio (Rule 1000, Commentary .03(a)(B)(3) and Rule 1000A, Commentary .02(a)(B)(3)); • The index or portfolio shall include a minimum of 20 component stocks (Rule 1000, Commentary .03(a)(B)(4) and Rule 1000A, Commentary .02(a)(B)(4)); and • Each U.S. Component Stock in the index or portfolio shall be listed on a national securities exchange and shall be an NMS Stock as defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS under the Exchange Act, and each Non-US Component Stock in the index or portfolio shall be listed on an exchange that has last-sale reporting (Rule 1000, Commentary .03(a)(B)(5) and Rule 1000A, Commentary .02(a)(B)(5)). The Exchange believes that these proposed standards are reasonable for international and global indexes, and, when applied in conjunction with the other listing requirements, will result in ETFs that are sufficiently broad-based in scope and not readily susceptible to manipulation. The Exchange also believes that the proposed standards will result in ETFs that are adequately diversified in weighting for any single security or small group of securities to significantly reduce concerns that trading in the ETFs based on international or global indexes could become a surrogate for trading in unregistered securities. The Exchange further notes that, while these standards are similar to those for indexes that include only U.S. Component Stocks, they differ in certain important respects and are generally more restrictive, reflecting greater concerns over diversification with respect to ETFs investing in components that are not individually registered with the Commission. First, in the proposed standards, component stocks that in the aggregate account for at least 90% of the weight of the index or portfolio shall have a minimum market value of at least $100 million, compared to a minimum market value of at least $75 million for indexes with only U.S. Component Stocks. 18 Second, in the proposed standards, the most heavily weighted component stock cannot exceed 25% of the weight of the index or portfolio, in contrast to a 30% standard for an index or portfolio comprised of only U.S. Component Stocks. Third, in the proposed standards, the five most heavily weighted component stocks shall not exceed 60% of the weight of the index or portfolio, compared to a 65% standard for indexes comprised of only U.S. Component Stocks. Fourth, the minimum number of stocks in the proposed standards is 20, in contrast to a minimum of 13 in the standards for an index or portfolio with only U.S. Component Stocks. Finally, the proposed standards require that each Non-US Component Stock included in the index or portfolio be listed and traded on an exchange that has last-sale reporting. 18 The Exchange states that “market value” is calculated by multiplying the total shares outstanding by the price per share of the component stock. The Exchange also proposes to modify Commentary .03(b)(iii) to Rule 1000 and Commentary .02(b)(iii) to Rule 1000A to require that the index value for ETFs listed pursuant to the proposed standards for international and global indexes be widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least every 60 seconds during the time when the ETF trades on the Exchange. If the index value does not change during some or all of the period when trading is occurring on the Exchange, the last official calculated index value must remain available throughout Exchange trading hours. In contrast, index values for ETFs listed pursuant to the existing standards for domestic indexes must be disseminated at least every 15 seconds during the trading day. This modification reflects limitations, in some instances, on the frequency of intra-day trading information with respect to Non-US Component Stocks and that in many cases, trading hours for overseas markets overlap only in part, or not at all, with Exchange trading hours. In addition, Commentary .03(c) to Rule 1000 and Commentary .02(c) to Rule 1000A are being modified to define the term “Indicative Intraday Value” as the estimate that is updated every 15 seconds of the value of a share of each ETF, for ease of reference in these rules and also in Rules 1002 and 1002A regarding continued listing standards. The Exchange also proposes to clarify in Commentary .03(c) to Rule 1000 and Commentary .02(c) to Rule 1000A that the Intraday Indicative Value will be updated during the hours the ETF shares trade on the Exchange to reflect changes in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the currency in which any component stock is denominated. The Exchange is also proposing to add a subsection
(i)to Commentary .03 to Rule 1000 and a subsection
(j)to Commentary .02 to Rule 1000A regarding the creation and redemption process for ETFs and compliance with Federal securities laws for, in particular, ETFs listed pursuant to the generic standards for international and global indexes. These new subsections will apply to PDRs listed pursuant to Commentary .03(a)(B) or
(C)and for IFSs listed pursuant to Commentary .02(a)(B) or (C). They will require that the statutory prospectus or the application for exemption from provisions of the 1940 Act for the ETF being listed pursuant to these new standards must state that the ETF must comply with the Federal securities laws in accepting securities for deposits and satisfying redemptions with redemption securities, including that the securities accepted for deposits and the securities used to satisfy redemption requests are sold in transactions that would be exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933. 19 19 15 U.S.C. 77a *et seq.* The Exchange states that the Commission has approved generic standards providing for the listing pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) 20 of other derivative products based on indexes previously approved by the Commission under Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act. The Exchange proposes to include in the generic standards for the listing of PDRs and IFSs, in new Commentary .03(a)(C) to Rule 1000 and Commentary .02(a)(C) to Rule 1000A, indexes that have been approved by the Commission as underlying benchmarks in connection with the listing of options, PDRs, IFSs, Index-Linked Exchangeable Notes or Index-Linked Securities. The Exchange believes that the application of this standard to ETFs is appropriate because the underlying index will have been subject to detailed and specific Commission review in the context of the approval of listing of other derivatives. For example, Section 107D (Index-Linked Securities) of the Amex Company Guide includes as one element of the standards for listing Index-Linked Exchangeable Notes pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) 21 the previous review and approval for trading of options or other derivatives by the Commission under Section 19b(2) of the Exchange Act and rules thereunder. 22 20 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 21 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 22 *See supra* note 5. This new generic standard will be limited to stock indexes and will require that each component stock be either
(i)a U.S. Component Stock that is listed on a national securities exchange and is an NMS Stock as defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS under the Exchange Act or
(ii)a Non-US Component Stock that is listed and traded on an exchange that has last-sale reporting. The Exchange is also proposing to include additional continued listing standards relating to ETFs that substitute new indexes, either in the instance where the value of the index or portfolio of securities on which the ETF is based is no longer calculated or available, or in the event that the ETF chooses to substitute a new index or portfolio for the existing index or portfolio. In both instances, the Exchange would commence delisting proceedings if the new index or portfolio does not meet the requirements of and listing standards set forth in Rules 1000 *et seq.* or Rules 1000A *et seq.* , as applicable. If, for example, an ETF chose to substitute an index that did not meet any of the generic listing standards for listing of ETFs pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e), 23 then for continued listing, approval by the Commission of a separate filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) 24 to list and trade that ETF would be required. 23 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 24 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). The Exchange proposes to modify the initial and continued listing standards relating to disseminated information to formalize in the rules existing best practices for providing equal access to material information about the value of ETFs. Pursuant to Rules 1002(a)(ii) and 1002A(a)(ii), prior to approving an ETF for listing, the Exchange will obtain a representation from the ETF issuer that the net asset value per share will be calculated daily and made available to all market participants at the same time. Proposed Rules 1002(b)(ii) and 1002A(b)(ii) set out the trading halt parameters for ETFs. In particular, the proposed rules specifically set out that if the Intraday Indicative Value (as defined in Commentary .03 to Rule 1000 and Commentary .02 to Rule 1000A) or the index value applicable to that series of ETFs is not being disseminated as required, the Exchange may halt trading during the day in which the interruption to the dissemination of the Intraday Indicative Value or the index value occurs. If the interruption to the dissemination of the Intraday Indicative Value or the index value persists past the trading day in which it occurred, the Exchange will halt trading no later than the beginning of the trading day following the interruption. The Exchange is proposing other minor and clarifying changes to Rules 1000, 1002, 1000A and 1002A. The standards set out in Commentary .03(a)(A) to Rule 1000 and Commentary .02(a)(A) to Rule 1000A are being modified to make the wording of each requirement consistent; in addition, standard
(5)has been modified to reflect the adoption of Regulation NMS. 25 Proposed Commentary .03(b)(iv) to Rule 1000 and Commentary .02(b)(iv) to Rule 1000A have been added reflect make sure that entities that advise index providers or calculators and related entities have in place procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material non-public information regarding the index underlying the ETF. 25 17 CFR 242.600 *et seq.* *See also* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005) (“Regulation NMS Approval Order”). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with Section 6 of the Exchange Act, 26 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act, 27 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 26 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 27 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. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others The Exchange did not receive any written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period
(i)as the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii)as to which Amex 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. The Commission is considering granting accelerated approval of the proposed rule change, as amended, at the end of a 15-day comment period. 28 28 Amex has requested accelerated approval of this proposed rule change, as amended, prior to the 30th day after the date of publication of the notice of the filing thereof, following the conclusion of a 15-day comment period. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Exchange Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-Amex-2006-78 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2006-78. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2006-78 and should be submitted on or before November 3, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 29 29 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). J. Lynn Taylor, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17396 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54598; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-042] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify Nasdaq Rule 4760 Relating to the Operation of the Nasdaq Crossing Network October 13, 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 October 4, 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 proposed rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposed rule change effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Nasdaq is proposing to modify Nasdaq Rule 4760 relating to the operation of the Nasdaq Crossing Network. Nasdaq plans to implement the proposed rule change on November 6, 2006. The text of the proposed rule change is available on Nasdaq's Web site ( *http://www.nasdaq.com* ), at Nasdaq's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, Nasdaq included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. Nasdaq has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose On July 5, 2006, the Commission approved Nasdaq Rule 4760 which governs the operation of the Nasdaq Crossing Network. 5 The Nasdaq Crossing Network will provide a new execution option to market participants trading in Nasdaq and other exchange-listed securities that will facilitate the execution of trades quickly and anonymously. Nasdaq expects to launch the operation of the Crossing Network on or about November 6, 2006. 6 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54248 (July 31, 2006), 71 FR 44738 (August 7, 2006) (SR-NASDAQ-2006-019). Prior to the effective date of Nasdaq's operation as an exchange for Nasdaq-listed securities, the rule governing the Nasdaq Crossing Network had been approved as an NASD rule (NASD Rule 4716). Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54101 (July 5, 2006), 71 FR 39382 (July 12, 2006) (SR-NASD-2005-140). 6 Telephone conference between Jan Woo, Attorney, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, and Jeffrey Davis, Senior Associate General Counsel, Nasdaq, on October 4, 2006 (correcting a typographical error in the filing which stated that Nasdaq plans to launch the operation of the Crossing Network on or about October 30, 2006). In anticipation of the launch, Nasdaq has proposed some minor modifications to Nasdaq Rule 4760. Due to the intervening approval of Nasdaq's Single Book integration rule proposal 7 which has caused a conflict regarding the numbering of certain Nasdaq rules, Nasdaq proposes to renumber the provisions governing the operation of the Nasdaq Crossing Network as Nasdaq Rule 4770. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54155 (July 14, 2006), 71 FR 41291 (July 20, 2006) (SR-NASDAQ-2006-001). In addition, in response to input from our members and other market participants, Nasdaq proposes to modify the times of the Reference Price Crosses during the regular hours session. Under the proposed rule change, the regular hours session crosses would commence at 10:45 a.m., 12:45 p.m., and 2:45 p.m. Eastern Time. Nasdaq also proposes to add a clarification to Nasdaq Rule 4770 about how Reference Price Cross orders will be allocated. The existing rule provides that Reference Price Cross orders will be allocated on a pro-rata basis, so that shares will be allocated pro-rata in round lots to eligible orders based on the original size of the order. If additional shares remain after the initial pro-rata allocation, those shares will continue to be allocated pro-rata to eligible orders until a number of round lots remain that is less than the number of eligible orders. The proposed rule change clarifies that any remaining shares will be allocated to the order which has designated the smallest minimum acceptable execution quantity. If more than one such order exists, any remaining shares will be allocated to the oldest eligible order. 2. Statutory Basis Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of section 6 of the Act, 8 in general and with section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 9 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with these requirements in that the changes are designed to address market participant input and issues raised in testing relating to Nasdaq's proposed reference price crossing product, which will provide the Nasdaq additional means for facilitating transactions. 8 5 U.S.C. 78f. 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
(1)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)by its terms become operative for 30 days after the date of this filing, 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) 10 of the Act 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 such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-042 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-042. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of Nasdaq. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to the File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-042 and should be submitted on or before November 9, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). J. Lynn Taylor, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17440 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54601; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-037] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change To Modify NASDAQ Rules 3350 and 4755 October 13, 2006. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on September 27, 2006, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission” or “SEC”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, and II below, which Items have been prepared by Nasdaq. On October 12, 2006, Nasdaq filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 Nasdaq has requested that this proposal, as amended, be approved on an accelerated basis by October 16, 2006 to coincide with the launch of Nasdaq's new Single Book execution system. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. In addition, the Commission is granting accelerated approval of the proposed rule change, as amended. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1, which supplemented the original filing, Nasdaq made certain technical and clarifying changes following discussions with Commission staff. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Nasdaq proposes to modify Nasdaq Rule 3350(a) to establish the national best bid rather than the Nasdaq best bid, as the basis for determining compliance with Nasdaq Rule 3350(a). Nasdaq also proposes to amend Nasdaq Rule 4755(a)(2) to clearly describe the test that Nasdaq's Single Book execution system will use to validate for compliance with applicable short sale rules for all securities that trade through the system. The text of the proposed rule change, as amended, is below. Proposed new language is italicized; proposed deletions are in brackets. 4 4 Changes are marked to the rule text that appears in the electronic NASDAQ Manual found at *http://www.nasdaqtrader.com.* 3350 Short Sale Rule
(a)With respect to trades executed on Nasdaq, no member shall effect a short sale for the account of a customer or for its own account in a Nasdaq Global Market security at or below the current best (inside) bid displayed in the [Nasdaq Market Center] *National Market System* when the current best (inside) bid is below the preceding best (inside) bid in the security. For purposes of this rule, the term “customer” includes a non-member broker-dealer. (b)-(l) No Change. 4755. Order Entry Parameters
(a)System Orders
(1)No Change.
(2)Short Sale Compliance-System orders to sell short shall not be executed if the execution of such an order would violate any applicable short sale regulation of the SEC or Nasdaq. *For Nasdaq securities, the System shall validate for short sale compliance using a bid tick based upon changes to the national best bid and offer disseminated pursuant to an effective transaction reporting plan. For NYSE and Amex securities, the System shall validate for short sale compliance based upon changes to the consolidated last sale disseminated pursuant to an effective transaction reporting plan.* (3)-(4) No Change. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, Nasdaq included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change, as amended, and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change, as amended. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item III below. Nasdaq has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Nasdaq proposes to modify Rule 3350(a) and Rule 4755(a)(2) to state that short sale compliance for Nasdaq securities will be based upon changes to the national best bid and offer (“NBBO”) as is currently the case in the INET system, as opposed to changes in the Nasdaq best bid as is currently the case in the Nasdaq Market Center. *Background.* Nasdaq states that section 10(a) of the Act gives the Commission plenary authority to regulate short sales of securities registered on a national securities exchange, as needed to protect investors. Nasdaq notes that although the Commission has regulated short sales since 1938, that regulation has been limited to short sales of exchange-listed securities. Nasdaq states that in 1992, Nasdaq, believing that short-sale regulation was important to the orderly operation of securities markets, proposed a short sale rule for trading of Nasdaq National Market securities that incorporated the protections provided by SEC Rule 10a-1. Nasdaq notes that on June 29, 1994, the SEC approved the NASD's short sale rule applicable to short sales in Nasdaq Global Market securities. 5 Nasdaq states that in its January 13, 2006, order approving Nasdaq's registration as a national securities exchange, the Commission granted Nasdaq an exemption from Rule 10a-1 to permit the application of Nasdaq Rule 3350 (the “Nasdaq Rule”) rather than SEC Rule 10a-1 to the trading of Nasdaq-listed securities on Nasdaq. 6 Nasdaq notes, however, that SEC Rule 10a-1 continues to apply to the trading of securities listed on other national securities exchanges. 5 Formerly referred to as “Nasdaq National Market” securities. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54071 (June 29, 2006); 71 FR 38922 (July 10, 2006) (approving name change). 6 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53128 (January 13, 2006). Nasdaq states that the Nasdaq Rule employs a “bid” test rather than a tick test because Nasdaq trades are not necessarily reported to the tape in chronological order. Nasdaq notes that, currently, its short sale rule prohibits short sales at or below the inside bid when the current inside bid is below the previous inside bid. Nasdaq notes that it calculates the inside bid from all market makers in the security and disseminates symbols to denote whether the current inside bid is an “up-bid” or a “down-bid.” In addition, Nasdaq notes that to effect a “legal” short sale on a down-bid, the short sale must be executed at a price at least $.01 above the current inside bid. Nasdaq states that the Nasdaq Rule is in effect from 9:30 a.m. until 4 p.m. each trading day. Also, Nasdaq notes that from the time the Nasdaq Rule was implemented until December of 2002, Nasdaq utilized the NBBO to calculate the bid tick used to determine short sale compliance. Nasdaq states that in December of 2002, Nasdaq modified the method it used to calculate the last bid by having it refer to the “Nasdaq Inside” which is comprised of quotations from all participants in the Nasdaq Market Center (known then as SuperMontage), rather than referring to the NBBO. 7 Nasdaq notes that it currently calculates and applies the Nasdaq-based bid tick indicator to all Nasdaq Market Center trades. With respect to trades executed outside Nasdaq execution systems and reported to Nasdaq, however, Nasdaq states that Nasdaq participants have been permitted to validate for short sale compliance by reference either to the NBBO-based bid tick or to the Nasdaq-based bid tick, provided that each firm selects and applies a single bid tick indicator for all such trades executed by that firm. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46999 (December 13, 2002); 67 FR 78534 (December 24, 2002). Nasdaq notes that it elected to apply the Nasdaq-based bid tick because at that time the NBBO was regularly different from the best bid that was reasonably accessible to many market participants. Nasdaq states that this would occur when a market that was relatively inaccessible, such as a manual, floor-based market with no electronic linkages, submitted a bid to the network processor that became part of the NBBO. When that bid created a down arrow for the NBBO-based bid tick, Nasdaq participants would be precluded from executing short sales, absent an exemption. Nasdaq notes that this was true even where Nasdaq participants could not access the other market and even though that market did not itself impose a bid-based short sale restriction. In that case, Nasdaq states that the Nasdaq participant could not execute a short sale on Nasdaq due to the downward bid tick, nor could it execute the sale on the inaccessible market due to the absence of a linkage with that market. Nasdaq notes that at the same time, Nasdaq's execution system could be forced to halt processing while the inaccessible market set the NBBO. Nasdaq believed that this situation was inequitable and that the appropriate outcome was to establish a bid tick based upon quotes that were accessible through Nasdaq systems. *Rationale for Proposal.* Nasdaq states that its rationale for using the Nasdaq-based bid tick rather than the NBBO-based bid tick for short sale compliance is less powerful today, and there are countervailing interests today that did not exist in 2002. Nasdaq states that as Nasdaq and the rest of the industry approach the implementation of Regulation NMS, the NBBO has assumed, and will continue to assume, increased importance, and participants will modify their systems to utilize the NBBO for a variety of trading, routing, and compliance purposes. Nasdaq notes that the majority of Nasdaq members are using the NBBO-based bid tick rather than the Nasdaq-based bid tick, and it is expected that more firms will do so as they program their systems to comply with Regulation NMS. Thus, Nasdaq states that to maintain its use of the Nasdaq-based bid tick would, at this point in time, fly in the face of overwhelming regulatory and industry momentum. Nasdaq believes that due to the relative activity on Nasdaq's systems, it will be far more disruptive for Nasdaq to apply the Nasdaq-based bid tick than to apply the NBBO-based bid tick. Nasdaq states that the INET system currently uses the NBBO-based bid tick, and it accounts for approximately 32 percent of consolidated trading in Nasdaq securities, whereas the Nasdaq Market Center accounts for approximately 11 percent market share in Nasdaq securities. Therefore, Nasdaq believes it will be less disruptive to continue using the NBBO-based bid tick employed by current INET users. In addition, Nasdaq notes that the NASD recently announced that all NASD members that execute short sales in the over-the-counter market must utilize the NBBO-based bid tick no later than November 3, 2006. Thus, Nasdaq states that since the vast majority of Nasdaq members are also NASD members that trade over-the-counter, Nasdaq members are already on notice that their systems must use the NBBO-based bid tick for short sale compliance by November 3. Nasdaq states that by moving to the NBBO-based bid tick, Nasdaq will be creating uniformity among joint NASD/Nasdaq members that trade Nasdaq securities on Nasdaq and in the over-the-counter markets. In addition, Nasdaq notes that this coincides almost exactly with the final roll-out of Nasdaq's new Single Book execution system. Nasdaq states that it would be more disruptive to require Nasdaq to continue to apply the Nasdaq-based bid tick during the roll-out of the Single Book execution system. Nasdaq is also proposing to amend Rule 4755(a)(2) to clearly describe the test that Nasdaq's Single Book execution system will use to validate for compliance with applicable short sale rules for all securities that trade through the system. Nasdaq states that for Nasdaq-listed securities, the rule states that the system will use a bid tick based upon the NBBO. For NYSE- and Amex-listed securities, the system will use a tick based upon changes to the last sale reported pursuant to an effective transaction reporting plan for those securities. 2. Statutory Basis Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the provisions of section 6 of the Act, 8 in general, and with section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 9 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f. 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change, as amended, will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-037 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-037. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the NASD. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2006-037 and should be submitted on or before November 9, 2006. IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change After careful consideration, the Commission finds that modification of the method used to calculate the bid tick indicator to determine the permissibility of a short sale and the clarification regarding which short sale price test Nasdaq's Single Book execution system will use to validate for compliance for short sales traded through the system are consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 10 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 11 which requires, among other things, that Nasdaq's rules be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 10 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Nasdaq has requested that the Commission find good cause for approving the proposed rule change, as amended, prior to the 30th day after publication of notice thereof in the **Federal Register** . Nasdaq has confirmed to the Commission that it would be more disruptive to market participants to continue to determine the permissibility of a short sale based on the Nasdaq-based bid tick rather than on the NBBO-based bid tick following implementation of Nasdaq's Single Book execution system. In addition, Nasdaq has stated that it does not believe that firms will face compliance issues, from a systems perspective or otherwise, if Nasdaq's Single Book execution system validates for short sale compliance based on the NBBO-based bid tick rather than on the Nasdaq-based bid tick. Thus, the Commission finds good cause exists, consistent with sections 6(b)(5) and 19(b)(2) of the Act, 12 to approve the proposed rule change, as amended, on an accelerated basis, prior to the 30th day after the date of publication of the notice of filing thereof in the **Federal Register** . 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5); 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act that the proposed rule change (SR-NASDAQ-2006-037) is approved on an accelerated basis. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 13 13 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). J. Lynn Taylor, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17441 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54594; File No. SR-NYSE-2006-81] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Addition of Real-Time Quotation Information to the NYSE OpenBook TM Service October 12, 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 October 5, 2006, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE” or “Exchange”), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the NYSE. The Exchange has filed the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act, 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 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 add real-time quotation information to the limit order information that it makes available through its NYSE OpenBook TM service. The NYSE has designated this proposal as non-controversial and has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-operative waiting period contained in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act. 5 The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site ( *http://www.nyse.com* ), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. 5 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, NYSE included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Currently, NYSE OpenBook TM consists of a compilation of limit order data that the Exchange makes available to market data vendors, broker-dealers, private network providers and other entities. With this proposed rule change, the Exchange proposes to add the Exchange's quotation information to the NYSE OpenBook TM package. The Exchange's quotes include the best bid and offer available for a security on the Exchange. That best bid and offer reflects not only the limit orders resident in OpenBook TM , but interest in the trading crowd and specialists' proprietary interest as well. The quotation information regarding the best NYSE bid or offer is the same quotation information that the Exchange provides to the Processor under the CQ Plan for consolidation with other markets' quotation information. That is, the Exchange is proposing to add the information that it makes available under the CQ Plan to its NYSE OpenBook TM service. The Exchange will make NYSE quotation information available through NYSE OpenBook TM in real-time and no earlier than it provides that quotation information to the Processor under the CQ Plan. The Exchange notes that the limit order products of fully automated markets, such as NYSE Arca's ArcaBook and Nasdaq's TotalView, already provide users with the quotation information that those markets provide under the CQ Plan. 6 6 The Commission made minor clarifying changes to this paragraph of the purpose section. Telephone conversation between Ron Jordan, Senior Vice President, NYSE, and Rahman Harrison, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission on October 12, 2006. The Exchange believes that the addition of NYSE quotation information to NYSE OpenBook TM will make NYSE OpenBook TM a more attractive product to the trading desks of broker-dealers and institutional investors. At this time, the Exchange is not proposing to add or change any OpenBook TM fee or to revise any OpenBook TM contract because of the addition of NYSE quotation information. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6(b) of the Act, 7 in general, and with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 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 foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in, securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received from Members, Participants or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change is subject to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 9 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder 10 because the proposal:
(i)Does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(ii)does not impose any significant burden on competition; and
(iii)does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest; provided that the Exchange has given the Commission notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 11 normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(b)(iii), the Commission may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay. 12 The Commission believes that such waiver is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because it would provide market participants that use OpenBook TM with more information about the current state of the NYSE market. For this reason, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be effective upon filing with the Commission. 13 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 13 For purposes only of accelerating the operative date of this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in 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-NYSE-2006-81 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2006-81. 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 NYSE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2006-81 and should be submitted on or before November 9, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 J. Lynn Taylor, Assistant Secretary. 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). [FR Doc. E6-17394 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Interest Rates The Small Business Administration publishes an interest rate called the optional “peg” rate (13 CFR 120.214) on a quarterly basis. This rate is a weighted average cost of money to the government for maturities similar to the average SBA direct loan. This rate may be used as a base rate for guaranteed fluctuating interest rate SBA loans. This rate will be 5.125 (5 1/8 ) percent for the October-December quarter of FY 2007. Janet A. Tasker, Acting Associate Administrator for Financial Assistance. [FR Doc. E6-17445 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Agency Information Collection Activities: Emergency Request and Comment Request The Social Security Administration
(SSA)publishes a list of information collection packages that will require clearance by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)in compliance with Pub. L. 104-13, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, effective October 1, 1995. The information collection packages that may be included in this notice are for approval of existing information collections and revisions to OMB-approved information collections. SSA is soliciting comments on the accuracy of the agency's burden estimate; the need for the information; its practical utility; ways to enhance its quality, utility, and clarity; and on ways to minimize burden on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Written comments and recommendations regarding the information collection(s) should be submitted to the OMB Desk Officer and the SSA Reports Clearance Officer. The information can be mailed and/or faxed to the individuals at the addresses and fax numbers listed below: (OMB), Office of Management and Budget, *Attn:* Desk Officer for SSA, *Fax:* 202-395-6974. (SSA), Social Security Administration, DCFAM, *Attn:* Reports Clearance Officer, 1333 Annex Building, 6401 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21235, *Fax:* 410-965-6400. The information collection listed directly below has been submitted to OMB for Emergency Clearance. SSA is requesting Emergency Clearance from OMB two weeks from the date of publication of this Notice. Your comments on the information collection are requested by that date. You can obtain a copy of the OMB clearance package by calling the SSA Reports Clearance Officer at 410-965-0454, or by writing to the address listed above. 1. *Request for Hearing by Administrative Law Judge—20 CFR 404.929, 404.933, 416.1429, 404.1433, 405.722, 418.1350—0960-0269.* SSA uses form HA-501 to document when applicants for Social Security benefits have their claims denied and want to request an administrative hearing to appeal SSA's decision. The scope of this form is now being expanded to include people who wish to appeal the decision that has been made regarding their obligation to pay a new Income-Related Monthly Adjustment Amount (IRMAA) for Medicare Part B, as per the requirements of the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003. Although this information will be collected by SSA, the actual hearings will take place before administrative law judges
(ALJ)who are employed by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The current respondents include applicants for various Social Security benefits programs who want to request a hearing where they can appeal their denial; the new additional respondents are Medicare Part B recipients whom SSA has determined will have to pay the new Medicare Part B IRMAA and who wish to appeal this decision at a hearing before an HHS ALJ. *Type of Request:* Emergency revision of an OMB-approved information collection. *Number of Respondents:* 669,469. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden per Response:* 10 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 111,578 hours. The information collection listed below has been submitted to OMB for clearance. Your comments on the information collection would be most useful if received by OMB and SSA within 30 days from the date of this publication. You can obtain a copy of the OMB clearance package by calling the SSA Reports Clearance Officer at 410-965-0454, or by writing to the address listed above. 2. *State Supplementation Provisions: Agreement; Payments—20 CFR 416.2095-416.2098, 416.2099—0960-0240.* Section 1618 of the Social Security Act contains pass-along provisions of the Social Security amendments. These provisions require that States which supplement the Federal Supplemental Security Income
(SSI)payments also pass along Federal cost-of-living increases to individuals who are eligible for State supplemental payments. If a State fails to keep payments at the required level, it becomes ineligible for Medicaid reimbursement under Title XIX of the Social Security Act. In order to make sure the States are maintaining the payment levels, they submit their payment amounts to SSA. Seven of the participating States may use a total-expenditures method, in which they send their total expenditures to SSA four times per year to prove that they are maintaining the regulated cost-of-living increase. The remaining twenty three States send SSA one annual report which shows that they have maintained the cost-of-living increase as per the regulations. Respondents are State agencies administering supplemental programs. *Type of Request:* Extension of an OMB-approved information collection. *Number of Respondents:* 30. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 51 hours. Reporting method Number of respondents Frequency of response Average burden per response Estimated annual burden (hours) Total Expenditures 7 4 60 28 Maintenance of Payment Levels 23 1 60 23 Total 30 51 Dated: October 12, 2006. Elizabeth A. Davidson, Reports Clearance Officer, Social Security Administration. [FR Doc. 06-8770 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 39
Traces to 39 documents
U.S. Code
- Findings and purposes§ 4701
- Reservation in patents of right of way for ditches or canals§ 945
- Federal facilities§ 9620
- Coastal impact assistance program§ 1356a
- Purposes§ 3501
- Unfair practices in import trade§ 1337
- Registration requirements§ 958
- Importation of controlled substances§ 952
- Registration requirements§ 823
- Definitions§ 601
- Production quotas for controlled substances§ 826
- Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; composition; tenure; duties; compensation§ 2039
- Open meetings§ 552b
- Information and advice from private and public sectors§ 2155
- Access to WTO dispute settlement process§ 3537
- Registration, responsibilities, and oversight of self-regulatory organizations§ 78s
- National securities exchanges§ 78f
- Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings§ 552
- Short title§ 77a
- Definitions and application§ 78c
CFR
- Institution of investigation.§ 210.10
- The response.§ 210.13
- Service of process and other documents.§ 201.16
- Application for importation of Schedule I and II substances.§ 1301.34
- Request for hearing or appearance; waiver; default.§ 1301.43
- Request for hearing; answer.§ 1316.47
- Redelegation of authority.§ 0.104
- Aggregate production quotas.§ 1303.11
- General functions.§ 0.100
- Schedule I.§ 1308.11
- Acceptance criteria for emergency core cooling systems for light-water nuclear power reactors.§ 50.46
- Definition of "short sale" and marking requirements.§ 242.200
- Delegation of authority to Director of Division of Trading and Markets.§ 200.30-3
- NMS security designation and definitions.§ 242.600
- What conditions apply for variable interest rates?§ 120.214
- Hearing before an administrative law judge—general.§ 404.929
13 references not yet in our index
- Pub. L. 94-579
- 43 CFR 2711.3-3(a)(5)
- 43 CFR 2710.0-3(a)(3)
- 100 Stat. 1670
- 43 CFR 2720.2(a)
- 43 CFR 2711.1-2(a)
- Pub. L. 109-177
- 17 CFR 240.19
- 17 CFR 240
- 15 USC 80a
- 5 USC 78f
- Pub. L. 104-13
- 20 CFR 416.2095-416
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of meeting
Pub. L.Pub. L. 94-579
Cite43 CFR 2711.3-3(a)(5)
Cite43 CFR 2710.0-3(a)(3)
Cites 52 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources