Notices. Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) for an exemption from section 15(a) of the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act, as well as certain disclosure requirements

24,388 words·~111 min read·/register/2006/11/08/06-9107

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

BILLING CODE 7710-12-M SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. *Extension:* Rule 17i-4; SEC File No. 270-530; OMB Control No. 3235-0594. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ) the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below.

Section 231 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 1 (the “GLBA”) amended Section 17 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* ) (the “Act” or the “Exchange Act”) to create a regulatory framework under which a holding company of a broker-dealer (“investment bank holding company” or “IBHC”) may voluntarily be supervised by the Commission as a supervised investment bank holding company (or “SIBHC”). 2 In 2004, the Commission promulgated rules, including Rule 17i-4, (17 CFR 240.17i-4.) to create a framework for the Commission to supervise SIBHCs. 3 This framework includes qualification criteria for SIBHCs, as well as recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

Among other things, this regulatory framework for SIBHCs is intended to provide a basis for non-U.S. financial regulators to treat the Commission as the principal U.S. consolidated home-country supervisor for SIBHCs and their affiliated broker-dealers. 4 1 Pub. L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338 (1999). 2 See 15 U.S.C. 78q(i). 3 See Exchange Act Release No. 49831 (Jun. 8, 2004), 69 FR 34472 (Jun. 21, 2004). 4 See H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 106-434, 165 (1999). See also Exchange Act Release No. 49831, at 6 (Jun. 8, 2004), 69 FR 34472, at 34473 (Jun. 21, 2004).

Rule 17i-4 requires an SIBHC to comply with present Exchange Act Rule 15c3-4 5 as though it were a broker-dealer, which requires that the firm establish, document and maintain a system of internal risk management controls to assist it in managing the risks associated with its business activities (including market, credit, operational, funding, and legal risks). In addition, Rule 17i-4 requires that an SIBHC establish, document, and maintain procedures for the detection and prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing as part of its internal risk management control system.

Finally, Rule 17i-4 requires that an SIBHC periodically review its internal risk management control system for integrity of the risk measurement, monitoring, and management process, and accountability, at the appropriate organizational level, for defining the permitted scope of activity and level of risk. 5 17 CFR 240.15c3-4. The collection of information required pursuant to Rule 17i-4 is needed so that the Commission can adequately supervise the activities of these SIBHCs, and to allow the Commission to effectively determine whether supervision of an IBHC as an SIBHC is necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of Section 17 of the Act.

Without this information, the Commission would be unable to adequately supervise the SIBHC as provided for under the Exchange Act. We estimate that three IBHCs will file Notices of Intention with the Commission to be supervised by the Commission as SIBHCs. An SIBHC will require, on average, about 3,600 hours to assess its present structure, businesses, and controls, and establish and document its risk management control system. In addition, an SIBHC will require, on average, approximately 250 hours each year to maintain its risk management control system.

Consequently, the total initial burden for all SIBHCs is approximately 10,800 hours 6 and the continuing annual burden is about 750 hours. 7 Thus, the total burden relating to Rule 17i-4 for all SIBHCs is approximately 11,550 hours 8 in the first year, and approximately 750 hours each year thereafter. 9 6 (3,600 hours × 3 SIBHCs) = 10,800 hours. 7 (250 hours per year × 3 SIBHCs) = 750 hours per year. 8 (3,600 hours × 3 SIBHCs) + (250 hours per year × 3 SIBHCs). 9 (250 hours per year × 3 SIBHCs).

We believe that an IBHC likely will upgrade its information technology (“IT”) systems in order to more efficiently comply with certain of the SIBHC framework rules (including Rules 17i-4, 17i-5, 17i-6 and 17i-7), and that this would be a one-time cost. Depending on the state of development of the IBHC's IT systems, it would cost an IBHC between $1 million and $10 million to upgrade its IT systems to comply with the SIBHC framework of rules. Thus, on average, it would cost each of the three IBHCs about $5.5 million to upgrade their IT systems, or approximately $16.5 million in total.

It is impossible to determine what percentage of the IT systems costs would be attributable to each Rule, so we allocated the total estimated upgrade costs equally (at 25% for each of the above-mentioned Rules), with $4,125,000 attributable to Rule 17i-4. The records required to be created pursuant to Rule 17i-4 must be preserved for a period of not less than three years. 10 The collection of information is mandatory and the information required to be provided to the Commission pursuant to this Rule is deemed confidential pursuant to Section 17(j) of the Exchange Act and Section 552(b)(3)(B) of the Freedom of Information Act, 11 notwithstanding any other provision of law. 10 17 CFR 240.17i-5(b)(5). 11 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(3)(B).

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Comments should be directed to:

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

(ii)R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, 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 23, 2006. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18790 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. *Extension:* Rule 17i-2; SEC File No. 270-528; OMB Control No. 3235-0592. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ) the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. Section 231 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 1 (the “GLBA”) amended Section 17 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act” or the “Exchange Act”) to create a regulatory framework under which a holding company of a broker-dealer (“investment bank holding company” or “IBHC”) may voluntarily be supervised by the Commission as a supervised investment bank holding company (or “SIBHC”). 2 In 2004, the Commission promulgated rules, including Rule 17i-2 (17 CFR 240.17i-2) to create a framework for the Commission to supervise SIBHCs. 3 This framework includes qualification criteria for SIBHCs, as well as recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Among other things, this regulatory framework for SIBHCs is intended to provide a basis for non-U.S. financial regulators to treat the Commission as the principal U.S. consolidated, home-country supervisor 4 for SIBHCs and their affiliated broker-dealers. 1 Pub. L. No. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338 (1999). 2 See 15 U.S.C. 78q(i). 3 See Exchange Act Release No. 49831 (Jun. 8, 2004), 69 FR 34472 (Jun. 21, 2004). 4 See H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 106-434, 165 (1999). See also Exchange Act Release No. 49831, at 6 (Jun. 8, 2004), 69 FR 34472, at 34473 (Jun. 21, 2004). Rule 17i-2 provides the method by which an IBHC can elect to become an SIBHC. In addition, Rule 17i-2 indicates that the IBHC will automatically become an SIBHC 45 days after the Commission receives its completed Notice of Intention unless the Commission issues an order indicating either that it will begin its supervision sooner or that it does not believe it to be necessary or appropriate in furtherance of Section 17 of the Act for the IBHC to be so supervised. Finally, Rule 17i-2 sets forth the criteria the Commission would use to make this determination. The collections of information required by Rule 17i-2 are necessary to allow the Commission to effectively determine whether supervision of an IBHC as an SIBHC is necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of Section 17 of the Act. In addition, these collections are needed so that the Commission can adequately supervise the activities of these SIBHCs. Finally, these rules enhance the Commission's supervision of the SIBHCs' subsidiary broker-dealers through collection of additional information and inspections of affiliates of those broker-dealers. We estimate that three IBHCs will file Notices of Intention with the Commission to be supervised by the Commission as SIBHCs. Each IBHC that files a Notice of Intention to become supervised by the Commission as an SIBHC will require approximately 900 hours to draft the Notice of Intention, compile the various documents to be included with the Notice of Intention, and work with the Commission staff. Further, each IBHC likely will have an attorney review its Notice of Intention and it will take the attorney approximately 100 hours to complete such a review. Consequently, we estimate the total one-time burden for all three firms to file their Notices of Intention would be approximately 3,000 hours. 5 Rule 17i-2 also requires that an IBHC/SIBHC update its Notice of Intention on an ongoing basis. 6 Each IBHC/SIBHC will require approximately two hours each month to update its Notice of Intention, as necessary. Thus, we estimate that it will take the three IBHC/SIBHCs, in the aggregate, about 72 hours each year to update their Notices of Intention. 7 Thus, the total burden relating to Rule 17i-2 for all SIBHCs would be approximately 3,072 hours in the first year, 8 and approximately 72 hours each year thereafter. 5 (900 hours + 100 hours) × 3 IBHCs/SIBHCs = 3,000 hours. 6 An IBHC would be required to review and update its Notice of Intention to the extent it becomes inaccurate prior to a Commission determination, and an SIBHC would be required to update its Notice of Intention if it changes a mathematical model used to calculate its risk allowances pursuant to Rule 17i-7 after a Commission determination was made. 7 (2 hours × 12 months each year) x 3 SIBHCs = 72. 8 (3,000 hours to file the Notices of Intention + 72 hours to update them) = first year cost of 3,072. The records required to be created pursuant to Rule 17i-2 must be preserved for a period of not less than three years. 9 The collection of information is mandatory and the information required to be provided to the Commission pursuant to this Rule is deemed confidential pursuant to section 17(j) of the Exchange Act and Section 552(b)(3)(B) of the Freedom of Information Act, 10 notwithstanding any other provision of law. In addition, Exchange Act Rule 17i-2(d)(1) 11 states that all Notices of Intention, amendments, and other documentation and information filed pursuant to Rule 17i-2 will be accorded confidential treatment to the extent permitted by law. 9 17 CFR 240.17i-5(b)(2). 10 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(3)(B). 11 17 CFR 240.17i-2(d)(1). An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Comments should be directed to:

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

(ii)R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an e-mail to: *PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov* . Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice. October 23, 2006. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18792 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. *Extension:* Rule 17i-6; SEC File No. 270-532; OMB Control No. 3235-0588. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ) the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. Section 231 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 1 (the “GLBA”) amended Section 17 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* ) (the “Act” or the “Exchange Act”) to create a regulatory framework under which a holding company of a broker-dealer (“investment bank holding company” or “IBHC”) may voluntarily be supervised by the Commission as a supervised investment bank holding company (or “SIBHC”). 2 In 2004, the Commission promulgated rules, including Rule 17i-6, (17 CFR 240.17i-6) to create a framework for the Commission to supervise SIBHCs. 3 This framework includes qualification criteria for SIBHCs, as well as recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Among other things, this regulatory framework for SIBHCs is intended to provide a basis for non-U.S. financial regulators to treat the Commission as the principal U.S. consolidated, home-country supervisor for SIBHCs and their affiliated broker-dealers. 4 1 Pub. L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338 (1999). 2 See 15 U.S.C. 78q(i). 3 See Exchange Act Release No. 49831 (Jun. 8, 2004), 69 FR 34472 (Jun. 21, 2004). 4 See H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 106-434, 165 (1999). See also Exchange Act Release No. 49831, at 6 (Jun. 8, 2004), 69 FR 34472, at 34473 (Jun. 21, 2004). Pursuant to Section 17(i)(3)(A) of the Exchange Act, an SIBHC must make and keep records, furnish copies thereof, and make such reports as the Commission may require by rule. 5 Rule 17i-6 requires that an SIBHC file with the Commission certain monthly and quarterly reports and an annual audit report. 5 15 U.S.C. 78q(i)(3)(A). The collections of information required by Rule 17i-6 are necessary to allow the Commission to adequately supervise the activities of these SIBHCs and to effectively determine whether supervision of an IBHC as an SIBHC is necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of Section 17 of the Act. Rule 17i-6 also enhances the Commission's supervision of an SIBHCs' subsidiary broker-dealers through collection of additional information and inspections of affiliates of those broker-dealers. Without these reports, the Commission would be unable to adequately supervise an SIBHC, nor would it be able to determine whether continued supervision of an IBHC as an SIBHC were necessary and appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of Section 17 of the Act. We estimate that three IBHCs will file Notices of Intention with the Commission to be supervised by the Commission as SIBHCs. An SIBHC will require about eight hours each month to prepare and file the monthly reports required by this rule (or approximately 96 hours per year). 6 On average, it will take an SIBHC about 16 hours each quarter (or 64 hours each year) 7 to prepare and file the quarterly reports required by this rule. An SIBHC will require about 200 hours to prepare and file the annual audit reports required by this rule. Consequently, the total annual burden of Rule 17i-6 on all SIBHCs is approximately 1,080 hours. 8 6 (8 hours × 12 months in a year) = 96 hours/year. 7 (16 hours × 4 quarters in a year) = 64 hours/year. 8 (96 hours per year to prepare and file monthly reports + 64 hours each year to prepare and file quarterly reports + 200 hours each year to prepare and file annual audit reports) × 3 SIBHCs = 1,080 hours. We believe that an IBHC likely will upgrade its information technology (“IT”) systems in order to more efficiently comply with certain of the SIBHC framework rules (including Rules 17i-4, 17i-5, 17i-6 and 17i-7), and that this would be a one-time cost. Depending on the state of development of the IBHC's IT systems, it would cost an IBHC between $1 million and $10 million to upgrade its IT systems to comply with the SIBHC framework of rules. Thus, on average, it would cost each of the three IBHCs about $5.5 million to upgrade their IT systems, or approximately $16.5 million in total. It is impossible to determine what percentage of the IT systems costs would be attributable to each Rule, so we allocated the total estimated upgrade costs equally (at 25% for each of the above-mentioned Rules), with $4,125,000 attributable to Rule 17i-6. The reports and notices required to be filed pursuant to Rule 17i-6 must be preserved for a period of not less than three years. 9 The collection of information is mandatory and the information required to be provided to the Commission pursuant to this Rule is deemed confidential pursuant to Section 17(j) of the Exchange Act and Section 552(b)(3)(B) of the Freedom of Information Act, 10 notwithstanding any other provision of law. In addition, paragraph 17i-6(h) specifies that all reports and statements filed by an SIBHC in accordance with Rule 17i-6 shall be accorded confidential treatment. 9 17 CFR 240.17i-5(b)(3). 10 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(3)(B). An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Comments should be directed to:

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

(ii)R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, 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. October 23, 2006. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18794 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. *Extension:* Rule 17i-3; SEC File No. 270-529; OMB Control No. 3235-0593. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ) the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. The Code of Federal Regulation citation to this collection of information is the following rule: Section 231 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 1 (the “GLBA”) amended Section 17 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* ) (the “Exchange Act”) to create a regulatory framework under which a holding company of a broker-dealer (“investment bank holding company” or “IBHC”) may voluntarily be supervised by the Commission as a supervised investment bank holding company (or “SIBHC”). 2 In 2004, the Commission promulgated rules, including Rule 17i-3, (17 CFR 240.17i-3.) to create a framework for the Commission to supervise SIBHCs. 3 This framework includes qualification criteria for SIBHCs, as well as recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Among other things, this regulatory framework for SIBHCs is intended to provide a basis for non-U.S. financial regulators to treat the Commission as the principal U.S. consolidated home-country supervisor for SIBHCs and their affiliated broker-dealers. 4 1 Pub. L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338 (1999). 2 See 15 U.S.C. 78q(i). 3 See Exchange Act Release No. 49831 (Jun. 8, 2004), 69 FR 34472 (Jun. 21, 2004). 4 See H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 106-434, 165 (1999). See also Exchange Act Release No. 49831, at 6 (Jun. 8, 2004), 69 FR 34472, at 34473 (Jun. 21, 2004). Rule 17i-3 permits an SIBHC to withdraw from Commission supervision by filing a notice of withdrawal with the Commission. The Rule requires that an SIBHC include in its notice of withdrawal a statement that it is in compliance with Rule 17i-2(c) regarding amendments to its Notice of Intention to help to assure that the Commission has updated information when considering the SIBHC's withdrawal request. The collection of information required by Rule 17i-3 is necessary to enable the Commission to evaluate whether it is necessary and appropriate in the furtherance of Section 17 of the Exchange Act for the Commission to allow an SIBHC to withdraw from supervision. Without this information, the Commission would be unable to make this evaluation. We estimate, for Paperwork Reduction Act purposes only, that one SIBHC may wish to withdraw from Commission supervision as an SIBHC over a ten-year period. Each SIBHC that withdraws from Commission supervision as an SIBHC will require approximately 24 hours to draft a withdrawal notice and submit it to the Commission. An SIBHC likely would have an attorney perform this task. Further, an SIBHC likely will have a senior attorney or executive officer review the notice of withdrawal before submitting it to the Commission, which will take approximately eight hours. Thus, we estimate that the annual, aggregate burden of withdrawing from Commission supervision as an SIBHC will be approximately 3.2 hours each year. 5 5 (1 SIBHC/every 10 years) × (24 hours to draft + 8 hours to review) = 3.2 hours. The collection of information is mandatory and the information required to be provided to the Commission pursuant to this Rule is deemed confidential pursuant to section 17(j) of the Exchange Act and Section 552(b)(3)(B) of the Freedom of Information Act, 6 notwithstanding any other provision of law. 6 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(3)(B). An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Comments should be directed to:

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

(ii)R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an e-mail to: *PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov* . Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice. October 23, 2006. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18795 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. *Extension:* Rule 17i-5; SEC File No. 270-531; OMB Control No. 3235-0590. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ) the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. Section 231 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 1 (the “GLBA”) amended Section 17 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* ) (the “Exchange Act” or the “Act”) to create a regulatory framework under which a holding company of a broker-dealer (“investment bank holding company” or “IBHC”) may voluntarily be supervised by the Commission as a supervised investment bank holding company (or “SIBHC”). 2 In 2004, the Commission promulgated rules, including Rule 17i-5, (17 CFR 240.17i-5) to create a framework for the Commission to supervise SIBHCs. 3 This framework includes qualification criteria for SIBHCs, as well as recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Among other things, this regulatory framework for SIBHCs is intended to provide a basis for non-U.S. financial regulators to treat the Commission as the principal U.S. consolidated, home-country supervisor for SIBHCs and their affiliated broker-dealers. 4 1 Pub. L. No. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338 (1999). 2 See 15 U.S.C. 78q(i). 3 See Exchange Act Release No. 49831 (Jun. 8, 2004), 69 FR 34472 (Jun. 21, 2004). 4 See H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 106-434, 165 (1999). See also Exchange Act Release No. 49831, at 6 (Jun. 8, 2004), 69 FR 34472, at 34473 (Jun. 21, 2004). Pursuant to Section 17(i)(3)(A) of the Exchange Act, an SIBHC would be required to make and keep records, furnish copies thereof, and make such reports as the Commission may require by rule. 5 Rule 17i-5 requires that an SIBHC make and keep current certain records relating to its business. In addition, it requires that an SIBHC preserve those and other records for at least three years. 5 15 U.S.C. 78q(i)(3)(A). The collections of information required pursuant to Rule 17i-5 are necessary so that the Commission can adequately supervise the activities of these SIBHCs. In addition, these collections of information are needed to allow the Commission to effectively determine whether supervision of an IBHC as an SIBHC is necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of section 17 of the Act. Rule 17i-5 also enhances the Commission's supervision of the SIBHCs' subsidiary broker-dealers through collection of additional information and inspections of affiliates of those broker-dealers. Without this information and documentation, the Commission would be unable to adequately supervise an SIBHC, nor would it be able to determine whether continued supervision of an IBHC as an SIBHC were necessary and appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of section 17 of the Act. We estimate that three IBHCs will file Notices of Intention with the Commission to be supervised by the Commission as SIBHCs. An SIBHC will require, on average, approximately 64 hours each quarter to create a record regarding stress tests, or approximately 256 hours each year. In addition, an SIBHC will generally require about 40 hours to create and document a contingency plan regarding funding and liquidity of the affiliate group. Further, an SIBHC will establish approximately 20 new counterparty arrangements each year, and will take, on average, about 30 minutes to create a record regarding the basis for credit risk weights for each such counterparty. 6 Finally, an SIBHC will generally require about 24 hours per year to maintain the specified records. 6 On average, each firm presently maintains relationships with approximately 1,000 counterparties. Further, firms generally already maintain documentation regarding their credit decisions, including their determination of credit risk weights, for those counterparties. We believe that an IBHC likely will upgrade its information technology (“IT”) systems in order to more efficiently comply with certain of the SIBHC framework rules (including Rules 17i-4, 17i-5, 17i-6 and 17i-7), and that this would be a one-time cost. Depending on the state of development of the IBHC's IT systems, it would cost an IBHC between $1 million and $10 million to upgrade its IT systems to comply with the SIBHC framework of rules. Thus, on average, it would cost each of the three IBHCs about $5.5 million to upgrade their IT systems, or approximately $16.5 million in total. It is impossible to determine what percentage of the IT systems costs would be attributable to each Rule, so we allocated the total estimated upgrade costs equally (at 25% for each of the above-mentioned Rules), with $4,125,000 attributable to Rule 17i-5. The collection of information is mandatory and the information required to be provided to the Commission pursuant to this Rule is deemed confidential pursuant to section 17(j) of the Exchange Act and Section 552(b)(3)(B) of the Freedom of Information Act, 7 notwithstanding any other provision of law. 7 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(3)(B). 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

(a)Whether these proposed collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden imposed by the collections of information;

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this publication. Please direct your written comments to R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, 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.* Dated: October 31, 2006. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18830 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Investment Company Act Release No. 27544; 812-13266] Fidelity Management & Research Company, et al. ; Notice of Application November 2, 2006. AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”). ACTION: Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) for an exemption from section 15(a) of the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act, as well as certain disclosure requirements. *Summary of Application:* Applicants request an order that would permit them to enter into and materially amend subadvisory agreements without shareholder approval and would grant relief from certain disclosure requirements. *Applicants:* Fidelity Management & Research Company (“FMR”), Strategic Advisers, Inc. (“Strategic”), Fidelity Rutland Square Trust II (“Rutland II”), Fidelity Rutland Square Trust III (“Rutland III”), Fidelity Rutland Square Trust IV (“Rutland IV”), and Fidelity Commonwealth Trust II (“Commonwealth,” collectively with Rutland II, Rutland III, and Rutland IV, the “Trusts”). *Filing Dates:* The application was filed on March 6, 2006, and amended on June 1, 2006, and October 9, 2006. *Hearing or Notification of Hearing:* An order granting the application will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on November 27, 2006, and should be accompanied by proof of service on the applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons may request notification of a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary. ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants, 82 Devonshire Street, Boston MA 02109. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Y. Greenlees, Senior Counsel, at

(202)551-6879, or Janet M. Grossnickle, Branch Chief, at

(202)551-6821 (Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company Regulation). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee at the Commission's Public Reference Desk, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-0102 (telephone

(202)551-5850). Applicants' Representations 1. Each Trust is a Delaware statutory trust and, prior to relying on the requested order, will be registered under the Act as an open-end management investment company. Each Trust will consist of one or more Portfolios (as defined below). 1 Strategic and FMR are investment advisers registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”). Any other Manager relying on the requested order will be an investment adviser registered under the Advisers Act. Strategic and FMR are wholly-owned direct subsidiaries of FMR Corp., a Delaware corporation. It is currently anticipated that Strategic will serve as the Manager to each Portfolio. 2 1 Applicants also request relief with respect to any investment adviser controlling, controlled by or under common control with FMR (individually or collectively, the “Manager”) and any current or future series of the Trusts that:

(a)is advised by the Manager;

(b)uses the manager of managers structure described in the application; and

(c)complies with the terms and conditions of the application (each such series, a “Portfolio”). All existing Trusts that currently intend to rely on the requested order are named as applicants. If the name of any Portfolio contains the name of a Sub-Adviser (as defined below), the name of the Manager will precede the name of the Sub-Adviser. 2 Applicants request that the requested order apply to the Trusts' and any Portfolio's successors in interest. A successor in interest is limited to entities that result from a reorganization into another jurisdiction or a change in the type of business organization. 2. The Manager will serve as investment adviser to each Portfolio pursuant to an investment management agreement between the Manager and the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio (the “Advisory Agreement”). The Advisory Agreement will be approved by the shareholders of the Portfolio and by the applicable board of trustees or directors (the “Board”), including a majority of the trustees who are not “interested persons,” as defined in section 2(a)(19) of the Act, of the Trust, the Portfolio or the Manager (the “Disinterested Trustees”). 3. Under the terms of the Advisory Agreement, the Manager will be responsible for providing a program of continuous investment management to each Portfolio in accordance with the investment objective, policies and limitations of the Portfolio. The Advisory Agreement also authorizes the Manager, subject to Board approval, to enter into investment sub-advisory agreements (“Sub-Advisory Agreements”) with one or more sub-advisers (“Sub-Advisers”). Each Sub-Adviser will be registered as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act. The Manager will monitor and evaluate the Sub-Advisers and recommend to the Board their hiring, retention or termination. Sub-Advisers recommended to the Board by the Manager will be selected and approved by the Board, including a majority of the Disinterested Trustees. Each Sub-Adviser will have discretionary authority to invest all or a portion of the assets of the Portfolio it serves. The Manager will compensate each Sub-Adviser out of the fees paid to the Manager under the Advisory Agreement. 4. Applicants request an order to permit the Manager, subject to Board approval, to enter into and materially amend Sub-Advisory Agreements without obtaining shareholder approval. The requested relief will not extend to any Sub-Adviser that is an affiliated person, as defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Act, of the Trust, the Portfolios or the Manager, other than by reason of serving as a Sub-Adviser to one or more Portfolios (“Affiliated Subadviser”). 5. Applicants also request an exemption from the various disclosure provisions described below that may require a Portfolio to disclose fees paid by the Manager to each Sub-Adviser. An exemption is requested to permit the Trust to disclose for each Portfolio (as both a dollar amount and as a percentage of the Portfolio's net assets):

(a)The aggregate fees paid to the Manager and any Affiliated Sub-Advisers; and

(b)the aggregate fees paid to Sub-Advisers other than Affiliated Sub-Advisers (collectively, “Aggregate Fee Disclosure”). If the Manager employs an Affiliated Sub-Adviser on behalf of a Portfolio, the Trust will provide separate disclosure of any fees paid to the Affiliated Sub-Adviser. Applicants' Legal Analysis 1. Section 15(a) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that it is unlawful for any person to act as an investment adviser to a registered investment company except under a written contract that has been approved by the vote of a majority of the company's outstanding voting securities. Rule 18f-2 under the Act provides that each series or class of stock in a series company affected by a matter must approve such matter if the Act requires shareholder approval. 2. Form N-1A is the registration statement used by open-end investment companies. Item 14(a)(3) of Form N-1A requires disclosure of the method and amount of the investment adviser's compensation. 3. Rule 20a-1 under the Act requires proxies solicited with respect to an investment company to comply with Schedule 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“1934 Act”). Items 22(c)(1)(ii), 22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and 22(c)(9) of Schedule 14A, taken together, require a proxy statement for a shareholder meeting at which the advisory contract will be voted upon to include the “rate of compensation of the investment adviser,” the “aggregate amount of the investment adviser's fees,” a description of the “terms of the contract to be acted upon,” and, if a change in the advisory fee is proposed, the existing and proposed fees and the difference between the two fees. 4. Form N-SAR is the semi-annual report filed with the Commission by registered investment companies. Item 48 of Form N-SAR requires investment companies to disclose the rate schedule for fees paid to their investment advisers, including the Subadvisers. 5. Regulation S-X sets forth the requirements for financial statements required to be included as part of investment company registration statements and shareholder reports filed with the Commission. Sections 6-07(2)(a), (b), and

(c)of Regulation S-X require that investment companies include in their financial statements information about investment advisory fees. 6. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt any person, security, or transaction or any class or classes of persons, securities, or transactions from any provisions of the Act, or from any rule thereunder, if such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. Applicants state that their requested relief meets this standard for the reasons discussed below. 7. Applicants assert that the shareholders are relying on the Manager's experience to select one or more Sub-Advisers well suited to achieve a Portfolio's investment objectives. Applicants assert that, from the perspective of the investor, the role of the Sub-Advisers is comparable to that of the individual portfolio managers employed by traditional investment company advisory firms. Applicants state that requiring shareholder approval of each Sub-Advisory Agreement would impose costs and unnecessary delays on the Portfolio, and may preclude the Manager from acting promptly in a manner considered advisable by the Board. Applicants note that the Advisory Agreement and any Sub-Advisory Agreement with an Affiliated Sub-Adviser will remain subject to section 15(a) of the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act. 8. Applicants assert that some Sub-Advisers use a “posted” rate schedule to set their fees. Applicants state that while Sub-Advisers are willing to negotiate fees that are lower than those posted on the schedule, they are reluctant to do so where the fees are disclosed to other prospective and existing customers. Applicants submit that the requested relief will allow the Manager to negotiate more effectively with each Sub-Adviser. Applicants' Conditions Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will be subject to the following conditions: 1. Before a Portfolio may rely on the order, the operation of the Portfolio in the manner described in the application will be approved by a majority of the Portfolio's outstanding voting securities, as defined in the Act, or, in the case of a Portfolio whose public shareholders purchase shares on the basis of a prospectus containing the disclosure contemplated by condition 2 below, by the sole initial shareholder before offering the Portfolio's shares to the public. 2. The prospectus for the Portfolio will disclose the existence, substance, and effect of any order granted pursuant to the application. The Portfolio will hold itself out to the public as employing the manager of managers structure described in the application. The prospectus will prominently disclose that the Manager has ultimate responsibility (subject to oversight by the Board) to oversee the Sub-Advisers and recommend their hiring, termination, and replacement. 3. Within 90 days of the hiring of a new Sub-Adviser, the affected Portfolio's shareholders will be furnished all information about the new Sub-Adviser that would be included in a proxy statement, except as modified to permit Aggregate Fee Disclosure. This information will include Aggregate Fee Disclosure and any change in such disclosure caused by the addition of the new Sub-Adviser. To meet this obligation, the Portfolio will provide shareholders within 90 days of the hiring of a new Sub-Adviser with an information statement meeting the requirements of Regulation 14C, Schedule 14C, and Item 22 of Schedule 14A under the 1934 Act, except as modified by the order to permit Aggregate Fee Disclosure. 4. The Manager will not enter into a Sub-Advisory Agreement with any Affiliated Sub-Adviser without that agreement, including the compensation to be paid thereunder, being approved by the shareholders of the applicable Portfolio. 5. At all times, at least a majority of the Board will be Disinterested Trustees, and the nomination of new or additional Disinterested Trustees will be placed within the discretion of the then-existing Disinterested Trustees. 6. When a Sub-Adviser change is proposed for a Portfolio with an Affiliated Sub-Adviser, the Board, including a majority of the Disinterested Trustees, will make a separate finding, reflected in the applicable Board minutes, that such change is in the best interests of the Portfolio and its shareholders, and does not involve a conflict of interest from which the Manager or the Affiliated Sub-Adviser derives an inappropriate advantage. 7. Independent legal counsel, as defined in rule 0-1(a)(6) under the Act, will be engaged to represent the Disinterested Trustees. The selection of such counsel will be within the discretion of the then-existing Disinterested Trustees. 8. The Manager will provide the Board, no less frequently than quarterly, with information about the profitability of the Manager on a per-Portfolio basis. The information will reflect the impact on profitability of the hiring or termination of any Sub-Adviser during the applicable quarter. 9. Whenever a Sub-Adviser is hired or terminated, the Manager will provide the Board with information showing the expected impact on the profitability of the Manager. 10. The Manager will provide general management services to each Portfolio, including overall supervisory responsibility for the general management and investment of the Portfolio's assets, and, subject to review and approval of the Board, will:

(a)Set the Portfolio's overall investment strategies;

(b)evaluate, select and recommend Sub-Advisers to manage all or a part of the Portfolio's assets;

(c)when appropriate, allocate and reallocate the Portfolio's assets among multiple Sub-Advisers;

(d)monitor and evaluate the performance of Sub-Advisers; and

(e)implement procedures reasonably designed to ensure that the Sub-Advisers comply with the Portfolio's investment objective, policies and restrictions. 11. No trustee or officer of a Portfolio, or director or officer of the Manager, will own, directly or indirectly (other than through a pooled investment vehicle that is not controlled by such person), any interest in a Sub-Adviser, except for:

(a)Ownership of interests in the Manager or any entity that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with the Manager, or

(b)ownership of less than 1% of the outstanding securities of any class of equity or debt of any publicly traded company that is either a Sub-Adviser or an entity that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with a Sub-Adviser. 12. Each Portfolio will disclose in its registration statement the Aggregate Fee Disclosure. 13. The requested order will expire on the effective date of rule 15a-5 under the Act, if adopted. For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, under delegated authority. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18890 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54680; File No. SR-CBOE-2006-86] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Duration of CBOE Rule 6.45A(b) Pertaining to Orders Represented in Open Outcry November 1, 2006. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on October 30, 2006, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the CBOE. The Exchange filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. 5 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 5 The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 5-day pre-filing notice and the 30-day operative delay required by Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). See discussion *infra* Section III. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The CBOE proposes to extend the duration of CBOE Rule 6.45A(b) (the “Rule”), relating to the allocation of orders represented in open outcry in equity option classes designated by the Exchange to be traded on the CBOE Hybrid Trading System (“Hybrid”) through January 31, 2007. No other changes are being made to the Rule. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the CBOE's Internet Web site ( *http://www.cboe.com* ), at the CBOE's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the CBOE 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 those 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 parts of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose In March 2005, the Commission approved revisions to CBOE Rule 6.45A related to the introduction of Remote Market-Makers. 6 Among other things, the Rule, pertaining to the allocation of orders represented in open outcry in equity options classes traded on Hybrid, was amended to clarify that only in-crowd market participants would be eligible to participate in open outcry trade allocations. In addition, the Rule was amended to limit the duration of the Rule until September 14, 2005. The duration of the Rule was thereafter extended through October 31, 2006. 7 As the duration period expired on October 31, 2006, the Exchange proposes to extend the effectiveness of the Rule through January 31, 2007. 8 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51366 (March 14, 2005), 70 FR 13217 (March 18, 2005) (SR-CBOE-2004-75). 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 52423 (September 14, 2005), 70 FR 55194 (September 20, 2005) (extending the duration of the Rule through December 14, 2005) and 52957 (December 15, 2005), 70 FR 76085 (December 22, 2005) (extending the Rule through March 14, 2006), 53524 (March 21, 2006), 71 FR 15235 (March 27, 2006) (extending the duration of the Rule through July 14, 2006) and 54164 (July 17, 2006), 71 FR 42143 (July 25, 2006)(SR-CBOE-2006-60) (extending the duration of CBOE Rule 6.45A(b) through October 31, 2006). 8 In order to effect proprietary transactions on the floor of the Exchange, in addition to complying with the requirements of the Rule, members are also required to comply with the requirements of Section 11(a)(1) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1), or qualify for an exemption. Section 11(a)(1) restricts securities transactions of a member of any national securities exchange effected on that exchange for

(i)the member's own account,

(ii)the account of a person associated with the member, or

(iii)an account over which the member or a person associated with the member exercises discretion, unless a specific exemption is available. The Exchange issued a regulatory circular to members informing them of the applicability of these Section 11(a)(1) requirements when the duration of the Rule was extended until December 14, 2005, March 14, 2006 and again on July 14, 2006. *See* CBOE Regulatory Circulars RG05-103 (November 2, 2005), RG06-001 (January 3, 2006), RG06-34 (April 7, 2006) and RG06-79 (July 31, 2006). The Exchange represents that it expects to issue a similar regulatory circular to members reminding them of the applicability of the Section 11(a)(1) requirements with respect to the proposed rule change. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations under the Act applicable to a national securities exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. 9 Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) 10 requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposal. 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)become operative for thirty days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 11 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 12 thereunder. 13 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 13 Pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange must provide written 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 on which the Exchange filed the proposed rule change. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 5-day pre-filing notice. The Commission has granted the request. *See* 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). A proposed rule change filed under Commission Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 14 normally does not become operative prior to thirty days after the date of filing. The CBOE requests that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay, as specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), and designate the proposed rule change to become operative immediately to allow the Exchange to continue to operate under the existing allocation parameters for orders represented in open outcry in Hybrid on an uninterrupted basis. The Commission hereby grants the request. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because such waiver will allow the CBOE to continue to operate under the Rule without interruption. For these reasons, the Commission designates the proposed rule change as effective and operative upon filing. 15 14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 15 For the purposes only of waiving the operative date of this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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 the furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-CBOE-2006-86 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2006-86. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the CBOE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2006-86 and should be submitted on or before November 29, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 16 16 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18793 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54681; File No. SR-NASD-2006-103] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to TRACE Requirements in Connection With the Exercise or Settlement of Options, Swaps, or Similar Instruments November 1, 2006. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on August 28, 2006, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared by NASD. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change NASD is proposing:

(1)To adopt NASD IM-6230, which would provide exemptive relief from various reporting requirements for transactions in TRACE-eligible securities executed in connection with the termination or settlement of a credit default swap or a similar instrument; and

(2)to amend NASD Rule 6250 to not disseminate information on certain transactions in TRACE-eligible securities executed in connection with the exercise or settlement of an option or similar instrument or the settlement or termination of a credit default swap, any other type of swap, or similar instrument. The text of the proposed rule change is available on NASD's Web site at *http://www.nasd.com,* at NASD'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, NASD included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposal. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. NASD has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose NASD is proposing NASD IM-6230, “Reporting Transactions Executed in Connection with the Termination or Settlement of a Credit Default Swap,” to provide exemptive relief from certain reporting requirements in NASD Rule 6230 for transactions in TRACE-eligible securities that occur in connection with the termination or settlement of CDSs or similar instruments. For certain transactions executed in connection with a broader class of instruments (options or similar instruments and CDSs, any other type of swaps, or similar instruments), NASD is proposing to amend its Rule 6250 to not disseminate information on transactions in TRACE-eligible securities executed in connection with the exercise, settlement, or termination of such instruments. Background When a CDS is subject to physical settlement, the buyer effects contract settlement by communicating to the seller, in a single or the first of two or more Notice(s) of Physical Settlement (or a similar document(s)) (“First NOPS”) within a fixed period, the TRACE-eligible security or securities, by CUSIP, that the buyer will deliver to the seller. However, following delivery of the First NOPS, the buyer may have additional business days (for example, three additional business days) to change the specific TRACE-eligible securities the buyer will deliver. Once the TRACE-eligible securities to be delivered are determined, the buyer delivers the TRACE-eligible securities to the seller and the seller delivers cash ( *e.g.* , the par value of the securities or some other pre-determined amount per debt security). Proposed NASD IM-6230 In Notice to Members 05-77 (November 2005), NASD clarified that a member that is a party to a transaction in TRACE-eligible securities that occurs in connection with the termination or settlement of a CDS 3 or a similar instrument must report the transaction to TRACE under NASD Rule 6230. 4 Since publishing this Notice to Members, NASD has received inquiries regarding the application of certain reporting requirements, including requirements relating to the time of execution, the application of the 15-minute reporting period, and how to report transactions when, under certain often-used CDS documentation providing for termination or settlement, parties may be permitted to substitute one TRACE-eligible security for another. 3 In a CDS, one party purchases protection from third-party credit risk from a counterparty seller. The purchaser of the protection is referred to as the “buyer” and the provider of the credit protection is referred to as the “seller” in proposed NASD IM-6230. Under a standard CDS agreement, an event such as a default is deemed a “credit event.” When a credit event occurs, a “credit event notice” is delivered by either the buyer or seller. Within a fixed period from the date a credit event notice is received ( *e.g.* , 30 days), the parties must communicate specific information needed to settle the CDS. 4 NASD Notice to Members 05-77 (November 2005), among other things, clarified that the reporting requirement applies only to those CDSs that are terminated or settled in whole or in part by the physical settlement involving TRACE-eligible securities, and has no application to CDSs that are cash-settled. NASD also addressed the TRACE reporting requirements for TRACE-eligible securities transactions executed in connection with a broader class of instruments—options and similar instruments, and CDSs, any other type of swaps and similar instruments—and not just those TRACE-eligible securities transactions executed in connection with CDSs. Timely Reporting Under NASD Rule 6230, a member is required to provide timely reports for transactions in TRACE-eligible securities. In addition, in most instances, such transactions must be reported within 15 minutes of the time of execution to be considered timely. NASD is proposing to provide exemptive relief from certain provisions of NASD Rule 6230 under proposed NASD IM-6230 for transactions that are executed in connection with the termination or settlement of a CDS, subject to certain conditions. Under proposed NASD IM-6230(a), such transactions would be deemed to be timely reported if they are reported before 8:15:00 a.m. E.T. on the next business day following receipt of the First NOPS, if the First NOPS was received on a business day, or before 6:30:00 p.m. on the next business day, if the First NOPS was received on a non-business day. In addition, a member would have to report such transactions using the TRACE memo field and include a “CDS” memo. 5 The CDS memo would allow NASD to properly categorize such transactions for purposes of examining the member for compliance with its reporting obligations and, as discussed below, for decisions to not disseminate the transaction information. 5 NASD also requires that such transactions be reported using the “special price” modifier or flag, which is appropriately used when a transaction is executed at a price based on arm's length negotiation and done for investment, commercial, or trading considerations, but does not appear to reflect current market pricing. *See* Notice to Members 05-77 (November 2005). NASD also proposes that the “time of execution” be construed as the time the transaction report is submitted. Under proposed NASD IM-6230(b), a member would enter as the “time of execution” the time that the member submits the transaction report. 6 6 If a transaction is reported before 8:15:00 a.m. E.T., NASD would assume that the First NOPS was delivered the prior business day. If a transaction is reported on or after 8:15:00 a.m. E.T., NASD would assume that the transaction was not reported timely. Firms would be expected to retain documentation, including the First NOPS, for transactions reported in connection with the termination or settlement of CDSs. NASD believes that the reporting scheme in proposed NASD IM-6230(a) and

(b)is appropriate for several reasons. NASD believes that the “time of execution” for CDS-related transactions is of less regulatory importance than for other reported transactions in TRACE-eligible securities because the price of a transaction in a TRACE-eligible security executed pursuant to a CDS is arrived at under the terms of the CDS agreement that are established at the time the CDS is agreed upon by the parties. Consequently, NASD believes that a precise time of execution is not required for regulatory purposes because such transactions are terminations or settlements of executory contractual obligations that do not provide useful data in connection with price discovery, determining best execution, or assessing reasonable mark-ups (or mark-downs). Rather, NASD requires the reports of CDS-related transactions in order to facilitate NASD's surveillance of the corporate bond market for the detection of various fraudulent or manipulative acts and unfair practices. Therefore, NASD is proposing that the time of execution of such transactions mirror the time of reporting. Moreover, for the same reasons, NASD believes that applying the 15-minute reporting requirement to such transactions imposes an unnecessary regulatory burden at this time. In addition, NASD believes that waiving the 15-minute reporting requirement will allow CDS buyers and sellers to process the First NOPS in all cases efficiently at some time during the business day that the First NOPS is received or the following morning through the first 15 minutes that the TRACE system is open, or, if the First NOPS is received on a non-business day, throughout the next business day until 6:29:59 p.m. E.T. Finally, NASD represents that the substantial costs to NASD of receiving and reviewing for market surveillance purposes a large number of “late” transactions (and the related “cancel/correct” late reports, as discussed below) and the substantial costs to members in respect of transactions where the time of execution is not critical for the purposes of NASD's regulatory review are secondary, but significant, reasons for proposing the exemptive relief in proposed IM-6230(a) and (b). Substitution of Securities; Exemption From Reporting; Exemption From Correction NASD is also proposing that a limited group of transactions in TRACE-eligible securities that are executed in connection with the termination or settlement of a CDS be exempt from reporting and that a related group be exempt from the requirement to correct a previously transmitted erroneous trade report. Under proposed IM-6230(c), if a buyer submits the First NOPS and triggers the obligation of one or both parties to the CDS to report the TRACE-eligible securities transactions, and then substitutes another TRACE-eligible security for delivery, NASD would not require a member to submit a “reversal” trade report (to cancel the previously submitted report for a transaction in a TRACE-eligible security that did not occur as a result of the substitution and delivery of another TRACE-eligible security). In addition, NASD would not require the member to submit a transaction report ( *i.e.* , a “cancel/correct” trade report using an as/of date) to report the transaction in the substituted TRACE-eligible debt security. NASD believes that the proposed exemptive relief under NASD IM-6230(c) recognizes the nature of CDS-related transactions and provides for reporting, but does not affect adversely the settlement process or the market in CDSs. Several factors informed NASD's proposed exemptive provision in NASD IM-6230(c). First, NASD notes that certain CDSs—sometimes referred to as “single name default swaps”—are not viewed as CDSs on a single debt security, but rather are considered a CDS on all of the issuer's debt securities of similar credit and seniority— *i.e.* , securities that are *pari passu.* 7 For purposes of a CDS, such debt securities of similar credit and seniority are viewed as virtually fungible within the issuer's capital structure. As a result, a purchaser of a CDS often may be permitted to choose from among several debt securities that are *pari passu* to make good delivery. NASD believes that the reporting of transactions in TRACE-eligible securities in connection with the termination or settlement of a CDS provides important market surveillance information that is not changed materially even if, subsequently, one or more of the specific TRACE-eligible securities reported initially to the TRACE system is substituted and a different TRACE-eligible security of the same issuer is delivered to effectuate settlement. 7 Securities that are *pari passu* are those that are entitled to be paid on an equal basis from the same pool of assets. Also, NASD has determined that any additional regulatory information and regulatory benefit obtainable from the “cancel/correct” trade reports and “late” reports (for any TRACE-eligible security delivered in substitution, as described above) are outweighed by the substantial costs that would be incurred by both NASD and members by requiring such follow-up reporting. Proposed Amendments to NASD Rule 6250 NASD Rule 6250 currently requires that information on all transactions in TRACE-eligible securities be disseminated immediately upon receipt of the transaction report, except transactions in TRACE-eligible securities that are purchased or sold pursuant to Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Rule 144A transactions”). NASD proposes to amend its Rule 6250 to not disseminate information on certain transactions in TRACE-eligible securities executed in connection with the exercise or settlement of an option or similar instrument or the settlement or termination of a CDS, any other type of swap, or similar instrument (hereinafter, the exercise, settlement or termination of such instruments is referred to collectively as “option exercises and/or swap settlements”). NASD proposes that such information not be publicly disseminated because it does not contribute to price discovery and may cause investor confusion. NASD also proposes to re-number current NASD Rule 6250(b), the exception from dissemination that applies to Rule 144A transactions, as new NASD Rule 6250(b)(1). As noted previously, NASD clarified that transactions in TRACE-eligible securities occurring as a result of such option exercises and/or swap settlements are required to be reported to TRACE. 8 However, although reported, NASD believes that the dissemination of pricing and other information on such transactions does not appear to provide market participants with information useful for price discovery purposes. NASD believes that this is due primarily to the fact that such options, CDSs, other types of swaps, and similar instruments are generally entered into significantly earlier than the occurrence of the option exercise and/or swap settlement. NASD notes that the agreements setting out the terms for these transactions generally determine the price of the TRACE-eligible securities at arm's length for investment, commercial, or trading purposes in a manner that tends not to be reflective of the current market price of the TRACE-eligible security as of the day and time that the transaction or transactions in TRACE-eligible securities occur ( *e.g.* , at the option exercises and/or swap settlement), which may be several weeks, months, or years later. 8 *See supra* note 4. In addition, NASD is concerned that for some investors, especially retail investors, the dissemination of such pricing information may cause significant investor confusion. If a significant number of transactions occur in a specific TRACE-eligible security as a result of option exercises and/or swap settlements and, at the same time, other market participants are executing transactions in the same TRACE-eligible security, the pricing information that would be disseminated would reflect divergent prices for the same security during the same period. For example, if a credit event occurs with respect to the issuer of the TRACE-eligible security or securities that are the subject of a CDS, a number of transactions in such TRACE-eligible securities would be reported at par ( *i.e.* , a price of 100) to TRACE and disseminated to the public when one or more CDSs are settled. At the same time, other transactions in the same TRACE-eligible security might be reported as executed at a price substantially discounted from par ( *e.g.* , a price of 60) and immediately disseminated (unless they are Rule 144A transactions). NASD has seen several such scenarios unfold and believes that such price dissemination may confuse investors, particularly less sophisticated investors. For these reasons, NASD proposes an exception to the general principle stated in NASD Rule 6250(a) requiring dissemination of transaction information of all TRACE-eligible securities except Rule 144A transactions. Proposed NASD Rule 6250(b)(2) provides that certain transactions that occur as a result of options exercises and/or swap settlements would not be disseminated. However, this proposed exception to dissemination is subject to certain important conditions. NASD represents that these conditions are intended to insure that the options, CDSs, other types of swaps, and similar instruments resulting in such transactions are bona fide and to limit the exception to TRACE transactions occurring as a result of instruments that, by the nature of their terms are not designed, at the time the agreement is entered into, to replicate, as option exercises and/or swap settlements, the then-current market price of the TRACE-eligible security. First, the proposed exception to dissemination would apply only to options, CDSs, other types of swaps, or similar instruments that are in writing and express legal and enforceable contractual obligations. Second, such instruments must have a term of at least 20 business days and could not be exercised, terminated, or settled earlier than the end of the 20th business day from the date of issuance. NASD represents that this condition is intended to limit the dissemination exception by excluding short-term options or similar instruments because they are more likely to be utilized as proxies for current market transactions in the underlying TRACE-eligible securities. The third condition is that the instrument must have an exercise or strike price that is fixed and out-of-the-money by at least 10 percent at the date of issuance, or a price formula that is fixed and results in an exercise or strike price that is out-of-the-money by at least 10 percent at the date of issuance, or a price formula that is fixed and results in a final price—combining any premium, installment or similar payment, and any strike or exercise price or similar term—that is out-of-the money by at least 10 percent at the date of issuance. Like the second condition above, NASD represents that this condition is intended to limit the dissemination exception to transactions that are not based on a current market price or negotiation or are not intended as a proxy for a current market transaction. For example, an option written deep in-the-money would be considered a proxy for a current market transaction and the exercise-related transaction would not be eligible for the TRACE dissemination exception. Similarly, the exercise-related transaction of an option with a pricing formula that at exercise utilizes the current market price or calls for a negotiation at the current market would not be eligible for the TRACE dissemination exception. 9 NASD believes that such formulas may result in transactions that provide important price discovery information to the market when disseminated and also are not likely to cause investor confusion if an investor seeks to determine the current market price of a particular TRACE-eligible security. Thus, as part of the third condition, NASD is proposing that the instrument be out-of-the money by at least 10 percent at issuance to ensure that instruments not be written “near the money” to serve as proxies for current market transactions. This may occur when two parties enter into an instrument expecting that, after the option or similar instrument is in place, one of them (or another party, as directed) will be able to move the current market price of an illiquid TRACE-eligible security by executing one or a few transactions in the security, resulting in the option or similar instrument becoming “in-the-money” and being exercised. 9 For example, a transaction in a TRACE-eligible security occurring as a result of the exercise of a “zero-strike” option, an option which simply tracks the value of the underlying instrument (in this case, a TRACE-eligible security) and expires (or is exercised) at the then current market value of the instrument it is tracking, would not be eligible for the TRACE dissemination exception. NASD also proposes to re-number current NASD Rule 6250(b), the exception to dissemination that applies to Rule 144A transactions, as new NASD Rule 6250(b)(1). Effective Date NASD would announce the effective date of the proposed rule change in a *Notice to Members* to be published no later than 60 days following Commission approval, if the Commission approves this proposal. NASD represents that the effective date of the proposed rule change would be not more than 90 days following publication of the *Notice to Members* announcing any Commission approval. 2. Statutory Basis NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, 10 which requires, among other things, that NASD rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. NASD believes that the proposed limited, conditional exemptive provisions requiring the reporting of transactions executed in connection with the termination or settlement of a CDS or a similar instrument would protect investors and are in the public interest in that they would facilitate and enhance NASD's surveillance of the over-the-counter corporate debt market, while recognizing the particular characteristics of such transactions and practices relating to execution and settlement, and providing sufficient flexibility to avoid adversely affecting the market in CDSs and similar instruments. Further, NASD believes that not disseminating information on TRACE-eligible securities transactions executed in connection with the exercise or settlement of an option or similar instrument or the settlement or termination of a CDS, any other type of swap, or similar instrument is in the public interest and protects investors, particularly retail investors, because the dissemination of such information may cause significant investor confusion, particularly for retail investors, and such information does not appear to contribute to price discovery by market participants. 10 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(6). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period

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

(ii)as to which NASD consents, the Commission will:

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

(B)institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NASD-2006-103 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-103. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of NASD. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-103 and should be submitted on or before November 29, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18798 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54685; File No. SR-NYSE-2006-95] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Include an Additional 32 Securities in the Current Exchange Pilot Operating in Conjunction With the Implementation of Hybrid Market Phase 3 November 1, 2006. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on October 26, 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 NYSE filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” 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 proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 5 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 5 The NYSE has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay. *See* Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange is proposing to include an additional 32 securities to participate in the Exchange's current pilot (“Pilot”) program which puts into operation certain rule changes pending before the Commission to coincide with the Exchange's implementation of NYSE HYBRID MARKET SM (“Hybrid Market”) 6 Phase 3. The additional securities are identified in Exhibit 3 to the filing. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the NYSE's Web site ( *http://www.nyse.com* ), at the principal office of the NYSE and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. 6 The Hybrid Market was approved on March 22, 2006. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53539 (March 22, 2006), 71 FR 16353 (March 31, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2004-05). 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 NYSE included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change, and discussed any comments it received on the proposal. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose On October 5, 2006 the Commission approved an Exchange Pilot 7 to, among other things, put into operation certain proposed modifications to Exchange Rules that are currently pending 8 before the Commission to coincide with the Exchange's implementation of the Hybrid Market Phase 3. The Pilot commenced on October 6, 2006 9 and is scheduled to terminate on the close of business November 30, 2006. 10 The Pilot applies to a group of securities, known as Phase 3 Pilot securities (“Pilot securities”). 11 7 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54578, 71 FR 60216 (October 12, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2006-82). *See also* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54610 (October 16, 2006), 71 FR 62142 (October 23, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2006-84) (amending the Pilot). 8 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54520 (September 27, 2006), 71 FR 57590 (September 29, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2006-65) (proposing to amend several Exchange Rules to clarify certain definitions and systemic processes) (“Omnibus Filing”); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54504 (September 26, 2006), 71 FR 57011 (September 28, 2006) (SR-NYSE 2006-76) (proposing to amend the specialist stabilization requirements set forth in Exchange Rule 104.10). In addition, in SR-NYSE-2006-73, filed on September 13, 2006, and Amendment No. 1 thereto (filed on October 13, 2006), the Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 127 which governs the execution of a block cross transaction at a price outside the prevailing NYSE quotation. 9 The changes related to stop orders and stop limit orders proposed in the Omnibus Filing were implemented on October 16, 2006 in order to give customers and member organizations sufficient time to make any changes necessary as a result of the elimination of stop limit orders. 10 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54675 (October 31, 2006). 11 Phase 3 Pilot Securities will also be posted on the Exchange's Web site. The Exchange is currently in the process of phasing in the securities operating under the Pilot. As expected, the Pilot is operating with minimal problems and the benefits are proving invaluable. The Pilot is providing the Exchange with the opportunity to identify and address any system problems. Moreover, the Exchange has the ability to identify and incorporate beneficial system changes that become apparent as a result of usage in real time and under real market conditions. The Exchange further has the ability to have real time user interface that is proving very useful to the Exchange. In addition to its usefulness to the Exchange, the Pilot is providing the current users with essential practical experience with the new systems and processes in a well-modulated way, in real time and under real market conditions that cannot be completely replicated in the mock-trading environment. The Exchange therefore seeks through this filing to include an additional 32 securities for participation in the Pilot. Among the securities the Exchange seeks to add to the Pilot is a security that was not listed on the Exchange when the Exchange initially sought approval for the Pilot. Specifically, the security traded under the symbol SAI was an initial public offering that occurred on October 13, 2006 subsequent to the Exchange's request to operate the Pilot and thus was not available to be included at that time. The Exchange believes that allowing additional securities to participate in the Pilot will increase the number of users that may benefit from the enhanced educational and supervisory training experience that the Pilot provides. Specialist firms will be able to provide an increased number of individual specialists with the educational opportunity of real time experience under real market conditions that cannot be completely replicated in the mock-trading environment. It will further provide an increased number of the specialists firms' supervisory personnel with additional opportunities for supervisory training in real time and under real market conditions. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the inclusion of additional securities will only further the Exchange's ability to identify and address any system problems and to identify and incorporate beneficial system changes while providing the new users with real time education. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirement under Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 12 that a registered national securities exchange have rules 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. The proposed rule change also is designed to support the principles of Section 11A(a)(1) of the Act 13 in that it seeks to assure economically efficient execution of securities transactions. 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 13 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1). 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 The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change:

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

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

(3)by its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the date 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) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay period for this “non-controversial” proposal. The Commission has determined to waive the 30-day operative delay. 14 The Exchange states that this waiver will allow the Exchange to immediately implement this proposal, which will allow specialist firms to provide more of their specialists and supervisory personnel with the educational opportunity of real-time experience under real market conditions under the Pilot program. Inclusion of additional securities in the Pilot may allow the Exchange to identify and correct any system problems 15 and formulate any necessary corrective changes. Therefore, the Commission finds that it is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest that the proposed rule change become effective and operative upon filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 16 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 17 14 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 15 The Exchange states that, currently, the Pilot is operating with minimal problems. 16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 17 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). At any time within 60-days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2006-95 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-2006-95. 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 NYSE's Office of the Secretary. 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-2006-95 and should be submitted on or before November 29, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 18 18 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18791 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-54686; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2006-68] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Revision of Certain Equity Transaction Fees November 1, 2006. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on September 29, 2006, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca” 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 substantially prepared by NYSE Arca. The Exchange submitted the proposed rule change under Section 19(b)(3)(A) 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). 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 the section of its Schedule of Fees and Charges for Exchange Services (the “Fee Schedule”) that applies to ETP Holders 5 executing certain round-lot transactions in NYSE-listed (Tape A) equity securities (other than Exchange Traded Fund (“ETF”) securities) on the Exchange. While changes to the Fee Schedule pursuant to this proposal are effective upon filing, the new rates became operative on October 1, 2006. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at *http://www.nysearca.com,* at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. 5 *See* NYSE Arca Equities Rule 1.1(n). 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 Arca 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 The Exchange proposes to amend the section of its Fee Schedule that applies to ETP Holders executing certain round-lot transactions in NYSE-listed (Tape A) equity securities (other than ETF securities) on the Exchange. The Fee Schedule currently provides that no transaction fee will be charged to ETP Holders for round-lot orders in NYSE-listed equity securities (other than ETF securities) that are executed in the NYSE Arca Book against inbound orders. The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to provide that ETP Holders will be entitled to a $0.002 per share credit for such orders. The Exchange proposes to offer this credit in order to compete more effectively with other exchanges that are offering liquidity rebates in NYSE-listed equity securities. The Exchange's Fee Schedule currently provides that a transaction fee of $0.001 per share will be charged to ETP Holders for round-lot orders in NYSE-listed equity securities (other than ETFs) that take liquidity from the NYSE Arca Book. The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to provide that ETP Holders will be charged $0.003 per share for such orders, including orders received through the Intermarket Trading System (“ITS”). 6 In addition, the Exchange proposes to amend footnote 1 to the Fee Schedule to note that such fees will apply to orders received through ITS. The Exchange proposes to increase this fee in order to offset the proposed credit for round-lot orders in NYSE-listed equity securities (other than ETF securities) that are executed in the NYSE Arca Book against inbound orders, as described above. 6 Since October 1, 2006, the effective date of the “Plan for the Purpose of Creating and Operating an Intermarket Communications Linkage Pursuant to Section 11A(a)(3)(B) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934” (“Linkage Plan”), connectivity between markets is provided pursuant to the Linkage Plan. The current ITS technology is used to effectuate both the ITS Plan and Linkage Plan. Therefore, the term “ITS” applies to the technology used to effectuate both the ITS Plan and the Linkage Plan. The Exchange will continue to charge $0.001 per share for round-lot orders in NYSE-listed equity securities (other than ETF securities) routed outside the NYSE Arca Book. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 7 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 8 in particular, regarding the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among exchange members and other persons using exchange facilities. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 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 that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 9 and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 10 because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by NYSE Arca. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(ii). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-NYSEArca-2006-68 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2006-68. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal offices of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2006-68 and should be submitted on or before November 29, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18829 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Data Collection Available for Public Comments and Recommendations ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Small Business Administration's intentions to request approval on a new and/or currently approved information collection. DATES: Submit comments on or before January 8, 2007. ADDRESSES: Send all comments regarding whether this information collection is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, whether the burden estimates are accurate, and if there are ways to minimize the estimated burden and enhance the quality of the collection, to Carol Fendler, System Accountant, Office of Investment, Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20416. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Fendler, System Accountant, Office of Investment 202-205-7559 *carol.fendler@sba.gov* Curtis B. Rich, Management Analyst, 202-205-7030 *curtis.rich@sba.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* “SBIC Management Assessment Questionnaire & License Application; Exhibits to SBIC License Application/Management Assessment Questionnaire”. *Description of Respondents:* Small business investment companies. *Form No's:* 2181, 2182, 2183. *Annual Responses:* 680. *Annual Burden:* 10,880. Jacqueline White, Chief, Administrative Information Branch. [FR Doc. E6-18920 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5612] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: DS 3072, Emergency Loan Application and Evacuation Documentation, OMB Control Number 1405-0150 ACTION: Notice of request for public comments. SUMMARY: The Department of State is seeking Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)approval for the information collection described below. The purpose of this notice is to allow 60 days for public comment in the **Federal Register** preceding submission to OMB. We are conducting this process in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. • *Title of Information Collection:* Emergency Loan Application and Evacuation Documentation. • *OMB Control Number:* OMB Control Number 1405-0150. • *Type of Request:* Revision of a Currently Approved Collection. • *Originating Office:* Bureau of Consular Affairs, Overseas Citizens Services (CA/OCS). • *Form Number:* DS 3072. • *Respondents:* Individuals. • *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 1000. • *Estimated Number of Responses:* 1000. • *Average Hours per Response:* 10 minutes. • *Total Estimated Burden:* 166 hours. • *Frequency:* On Occasion. • *Obligation to Respond:* Required to obtain or retain a benefit. DATES: The Department will accept comments from the public up to 60 days from November 8, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods: • *E-mail: ASKPRI@state.gov* . • *Mail (paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions):* U.S. Department of State, CA/OCS/PRI, SA-29, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20520. • *Fax:* 202-736-9111. • *Hand Delivery or Courier:* U.S. Department of State, CA/OCS/PRI, 2100 Pennsylvania Avenue, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20037. You must include the DS form number (if applicable), information collection title, and OMB control number in any correspondence. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Direct requests for additional information regarding the collection listed in this notice, including requests for copies of the proposed information collection and supporting documents, to Monica A. Gaw, Bureau of Consular Affairs, Overseas Citizens Services (CA/OCS/PRI), U.S. Department of State, SA-29, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20520, who may be reached on

(202)736-9107 or *ASKPRI@state.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are soliciting public comments to permit the Department to: • Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper performance of our functions. • Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the proposed collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used. • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected. • Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of technology. *Abstract of proposed collection:* The purpose of the DS-3072 is to process these emergency loans for destitute citizens and to document the safe and efficient evacuation of private U.S. citizens, dependents and third country nationals from abroad. The information will be used to process the emergency loan, facilitate reception and resettlement assistance in the United States and for debt collection. Respondents are private U.S. citizens and their dependents abroad who are destitute and in need of repatriation to the United States; private U.S. citizens and their dependents abroad who are in need of emergency medical and dietary assistance who are unable to obtain such services otherwise; and private U.S. citizens abroad and their dependents and third country nationals who are in need of evacuation when their lives are endangered by war, civil unrest, or natural disaster. *Methodology:* The information is collected in person, by fax, or via mail. The Bureau of Consular Affairs is currently exploring options to make this information collection available electronically. Dated: November 1, 2006. Maura Harty, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Consular Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E6-18870 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-06-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5611] Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Jasper Johns: An Allegory of Painting, 1955-1965” SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, *et seq.* ; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, *et seq.* ), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the exhibition “Jasper Johns: An Allegory of Painting, 1955-1965,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC, from on or about January 28, 2007 to on or about April 29, 2007, and at possible additional venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Wolodymyr Sulzynsky, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-453-8050). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW. Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001. Dated: November 2, 2006. C. Miller Crouch, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E6-18876 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5610] Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs

(ECA)Request for Proposals for the Fundraising, Construction, Development, Organization and Management of a U.S. Pavilion/Exhibition at the World Expo 2010 Shanghai, China *Executive Summary:* The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs

(ECA)of the Department of State requests proposals from private U.S. individuals, firms, associations and organizations (for profit and non-profit) for the fundraising, construction, development, organization and management of a U.S. pavilion/exhibition at the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China. The U.S. pavilion will be situated on a 6,000 square meter plot with a building footprint of 60% to 80% of the plot size. It could have multiple floors to a height not exceeding 20 meters. The Department will issue a “letter of intent” to the organization submitting the winning proposal authorizing that organization to proceed with fundraising to complete the U.S. Pavilion project. The letter will include guidelines on fundraising to be followed by the winning organization and will establish a deadline for completion of all fundraising activities. Note that all prospective donors will be vetted with the Department of State for potential conflict of interest. Cost for a representative U.S. pavilion/exhibit for Expo Shanghai 2010 is estimated to range between $75 million to $100 million and will be the sole responsibility of winning organization. The Department of State is not now authorized, and does not in the future intend to seek authorization from the U.S. Congress, to provide funding for any aspect of the U.S. pavilion/exhibition at the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China. The successful applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the design, development, construction, and management of all aspects of the U.S. Pavilion, as well as all support for the U.S. Commissioner General. The U.S. Pavilion shall be considered on loan to the U.S. Government, and the successful applicant shall be solely responsible for the disposition of the U.S. Pavilion at the conclusion of the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China. The aforementioned loan shall be treated as a gift to the U.S. Government. Only after the organization is able to demonstrate that all funding required for this project is in hand will the Department of State sign a Memorandum of Understanding

(MOU)with that organization, sign a Participation Contract with the Expo organizing body, and appoint a Commissioner General. Proposals from non-U.S. citizens or non-U.S. firms or organizations shall be deemed *ineligible for consideration.* *Authority:* Overall authority for Department of State support for U.S. participation in international expositions is contained in Section 102(a)(3) of the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2452(a)(3), also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the Act is “to enable the Government of the United States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries * * *; to strengthen the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of the people of the United States and other nations * * * and thus to assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic and peaceful relations between the United States and the other countries of the world.” Pursuant to this authority, ECA is the Department bureau responsible for coordinating U.S. participation in the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China. Consequently, ECA will represent the U.S. Government in dealings with the organizers of the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China. *Background:* The Government of China has invited the United States to participate in the 2010 World Exposition in Shanghai, China and the U.S. Government has advised the Chinese Government of its intention to participate with an official U.S. Pavilion. The World Expo 2010 Shanghai China will be held on specially constructed exhibition grounds. The Expo opens on May 1, 2010 and closes on October 31, 2010. World Expo 2010 Shanghai China is a large-scale international exposition or “world's fair” sanctioned or “registered” by the Bureau of International Expositions (BIE), an international treaty organization established to sanction and monitor international exhibitions of long duration (over three weeks) and significant scale. Invitations to world's fairs are extended from the host government to other governments. The United States is not a member of the BIE, and the U.S. Commissioner General will therefore not be a formal member of the Steering Committee of the College of Commissioners General for the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China. With a projected 70 million visitors, the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China offers an excellent opportunity to educate and inform foreign audiences about the United States and its people and to promote broad U.S. commercial interests around the world. U.S. participation in Expo 2010 Shanghai China will confirm the strength and importance of U.S.-China bilateral ties and promote mutual understanding between the people of China and the United States. The overall theme of the Expo, “Better City, Better Life”, will feature “harmonious co-existence of diverse cultures, harmonious economic development, harmonious living in the age of science and technology, harmonious functioning of communities—the cell of the city—and harmonious interactions between urban and rural areas.” The theme for the U.S. Pavilion Exhibition should be directly linked to the overall theme of the Expo. ECA would welcome proposals for an exhibition to showcase American expertise and trends in some or all of the following areas: sustainable economic development and urban planning, the history of urban transportation, the role of historic and cultural preservation as well as urban parks in animating urban life and promoting cultural tourism; educating for economically sound environmental practices; the role played by a city as a platform for the construction of social relationships and social space, whether formal or informal. Other exhibit themes related to the overall Expo theme may also be proposed. The design concept for the U.S. Pavilion exhibition should appeal to a general, non-expert audience. The U.S. Pavilion at World Expo 2010 Shanghai China will be an official representation of the United States; ECA must therefore ensure that the U.S. exhibit is nonpolitical in nature, of the highest possible quality, and balanced and representative of the diversity of American political, social and cultural life. The pavilion/exhibit must maintain the highest level of scholarly integrity and meet the highest standards of artistic achievement and academic excellence. The U.S. Pavilion will be used to promote U.S. commercial interests as well as highlight outstanding U.S. cultural and artistic achievements. The proposed design for the U.S. Pavilion should include functional space for three purposes: an exhibition area, a live performance area and an administration/hospitality lounge area. Further information on the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China can be found at the official expo Web site: *http://www.expo2010china.com/* *Funding Limitations:* Section 204 of PL 106-113 (22 U.S.C. 2452b) limits the support the Department of State may provide for U.S. participation in international expositions registered by the Bureau of International Expositions (BIE). This includes the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China. This Request for Proposals is intended to help identify a private U.S. individual, firm or organization interested in and capable of providing a complete pavilion/exhibit at the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China as a gift to the United States Government. The Department of State is not now authorized, and does not in the future intend to seek authorization from the U.S. Congress, to provide funding for any aspect of the U.S. exhibition at the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China. *Costs:* The U.S. pavilion will be situated on a 6,000 square meter plot with a building footprint of 60% to 80% of the plot size. It could have multiple floors to a height not exceeding 20 meters. It is estimated that a representative US pavilion/exhibit exhibition in that space will cost between $75 million and $100 million costs would include, but not be limited to: • *Design and construction* of a building to house the exhibit and provide and appealing welcome on the exterior façade; provide exterior landscaping; incorporate appropriate internal and external crowd control features; • *Design* of the exhibition; development of the story line; • *Raising all necessary funds;* • *Production of* exhibits, audio-visual materials, films, DVDs, videos, posters and other promotional materials needed for the exhibit; • *Promote and advertise* the U.S. exhibition and Pavilion; • *Manage all administrative, personnel and exhibit costs,* including salaries, benefits, staff housing expenses, contracting and supplier costs and consulting fees as well as funding associated with guides, escorts, and gifts; • *Transport,* travel, insurance, postage and shipping fees; • *Security,* development and implementation of a security program for the U.S. Pavilion in consultation with the State Department and appropriate Chinese authorities; • *Tear-down,* including removal of exhibits and return of the pavilion in the condition required by the Expo organizers; • *Cultural* and informational programs associated with the exhibition, including, but not limited to, production of U.S. National Day activities; • *Funding* all expenses associated with the U.S. Commissioner General; and • *Creation and staffing* of facilities devoted to hosting all VIPs visiting the U.S. Pavilion. *Expo Guidelines:* Interested parties may obtain copies of the General Regulations and Expo Guidelines from the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China offices in China at: Bureau of Shanghai World Expo Coordination, 3588 Pudong

(S)Road, Shanghai 200125, China. Proposals should be provided in a narrative of no more than twenty

(20)pages, single-spaced, plus a detailed budget with necessary attachments and/or exhibits. The narrative and additional documents should outline in as much detail as possible plans for providing a U.S. exhibition at the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China. Proposals should address the following: • Willingness to adhere to the General Regulations of the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China as stipulated by the Expo organizers, including restrictions and limitation related to construction; • Track record of working with exhibitions and on the proposed theme; • Experienced staff with language facility; • Clear concept for the exhibit plan and storyline; • Detailed fundraising plan listing intended individuals and institutions to be approached, description of donation and sample donation agreement; • Detailed budget showing breakdown of budget items required for each aspect of the project development and implementation; • Timeline detailing each step in the design, construction, and breakdown of the U.S. Pavilion as well as the development of the U.S. Pavilion content and; • Commitment to consult closely with and follow the guidance of ECA and U.S. diplomatic officers in China. Proposals should state clearly that all materials developed specifically for the project will be subject to review and approval by ECA. *Eligible applicants:* Applications may be submitted by public and private organizations (non-profit and profit). Non-profit organization must meet the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3). *Contact Information to Request an Application Package:* Please contact the Office of Citizen Exchanges, ECA/PE/C, Room 220, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC, 20547, tel.: 202-453-8161; fax: 202-453-8168; or e-mail *OgulJE@state.gov* (with copies to PerezL@state.gov and *HarveyRH@state.gov* ) for assistance. Please refer to Citizen Exchanges Shanghai Expo when making your request. *General Information Contact:* James Ogul, Program Officer, telephone to 202-453-8161, fax to 202-453-8168 or e-mail at *OgulJE@state.gov.* Non-profit organizations must have nonprofit status with the IRS at the time of application. If your organization is a private nonprofit which has not received a grant or cooperative agreement from ECA in the past three years, or if your organization received nonprofit status from the IRS within the past four years, you must submit the necessary documentation to verify nonprofit status. Failure to do so will cause your proposal to be declared technically ineligible. *Application Deadline and Methods of Submission:* *Application Deadline Date:* Thursday, February 9, 2007. *Reference:* Citizen Exchanges Shanghai Expo. Submitting Applications Due to heightened security measures, proposal submissions must be sent via a nationally recognized overnight delivery service ( *i.e.* , DHL, Federal Express, UPS, Airborne Express, or U.S. Postal Service Express Overnight Mail, etc.) and be shipped no later than the above deadline. The delivery services used by applicants must have in-place, centralized shipping identification and tracking systems that may be accessed via the Internet and delivery people who are identifiable by commonly recognized uniforms and delivery vehicles. Proposals shipped on or before the above deadline but received at ECA more than seven days after the deadline will be ineligible for further consideration under this competition. Proposals shipped after the established deadlines are ineligible for consideration under this competition. It is each applicant's responsibility to ensure that each package is marked with a legible tracking number and to monitor/confirm delivery to ECA via the Internet. ECA will not notify you upon receipt of application. Delivery of proposal packages may not be made via local courier service or in person for this competition. Faxed documents will not be accepted at any time. Only proposals submitted as stated above will be considered. Applications may not be submitted electronically at this time. The original and ten copies of the application should be sent to: U.S. Department of State, SA-44, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Ref.: Citizen Exchanges Shanghai Expo, Shanghai Program Management, ECA/PE, Room 224, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547. Applicants must also submit the “Executive Summary” and “Proposal Narrative” sections of the proposal in text (.txt) format on a PC-formatted disk. The Bureau will provide these files electronically to the appropriate Public Affairs Section at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing for its review. Application Review Information Review Process Proposals will be deemed ineligible if they are not submitted by a U.S. citizen, corporation or U.S.-based organization and do not fully adhere to the General Regulations of the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China and the guidelines stated herein. The Bureau will review all proposals for technical eligibility. Proposals will be deemed ineligible if they do not fully adhere to the guidelines stated herein and in the Solicitation Package. The program office, as well as relevant elements of the U.S. Mission in China will review all eligible proposals. Eligible proposals will be subject to compliance with Federal and Bureau regulations and guidelines. A panel of senior U.S. Government employees and private sector experts will review eligible proposals. Proposals may also be reviewed by the Office of the Legal Adviser or by other Department elements. The final decision on a potential U.S. exhibitor will be at the discretion of the Department of State's Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs. Review Criteria Technically eligible proposals will be reviewed according to the criteria stated below. These criteria are not rank-ordered and all carry equal weight in the evaluation. 1. *Program planning to achieve exhibit objectives:* Proposals should clearly demonstrate how the planned exhibit will educate and inform foreign audiences about the United States and its people and promote broad U.S. commercial interests around the world, as well as how specifically it will address the theme and General Regulations of the Expo. Exhibit objectives should be reasonable, feasible, and flexible. The general concept for the pavilion structure should include three basic areas: an exhibition area, a live performance area and an administration/hospitality lounge area. The proposal should contain a detailed timeline and budget that demonstrate substantive undertakings and fundraising and logistical capacity. 2. *Institutional Capacity/Record/Ability:* Proposed personnel and institutional resources should be defined and adequate and appropriate to achieve the exhibit's goals. Proposals should demonstrate an institutional record of successful exhibit activities, including responsible fiscal management and full compliance with all BIE-registered Expo requirements. ECA will give serious weight to past performance and demonstrated potential of the staffing proposed for the project. 3. *Multiplier effect/impact:* Proposals should clearly state how exhibit content and related activities will strengthen long-term mutual understanding between the United States and China. 4. *Support of Diversity:* Proposals should demonstrate how plans will address ECA's requirement to encourage the involvement of participants from all traditionally underrepresented groups including women, racial and ethnic minorities and people with disabilities. 5. *Monitoring and Project Evaluation Plan:* Proposals that include a plan to measure the impact of the proposed U.S. exhibition, cultural and information programs are encouraged. 6. *Cost-effectiveness:* Proposals must include a proposed action plan and timeline for all aspects of the project with associated budget estimates. Proposals must also present a credible fundraising plan to fund all aspects of the U.S. Pavilion project. Note that prospective donors will be vetted with the State Department for potential conflict of interest. *Reporting Requirements:* You must provide ECA with a hard copy original plus two copies of the following reports: 1. A program and financial reports no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award; 2. A program and financial reports every 90 days after the signature of the Memorandum of Understanding. Agency Contacts For questions about this announcement, contact: The Office of Citizen Exchanges, ECA/PE/C, Room 220, Citizen Exchanges Shanghai Expo, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC, 20547; Attention: James E. Ogul Tel.: 202-453-8161; Fax: 202-453-8168; *OgulJE@state.gov.* For correspondence with the Bureau concerning this RFP should reference Citizen Exchanges Shanghai Expo. *Other Information:* *Notice:* The terms and conditions published in this Request for Proposals are binding and may not be modified by any ECA representative. Explanatory information provided by ECA that contradicts published language will not be binding. Issuance of this RFP does not constitute an intention to agree to work with any private sector exhibitor at the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China. ECA reserves the right to select the final U.S. exhibitor for the World Expo 2010 Shanghai China and to approve all elements of the exhibition and project. Decisions made based on indications of interest submitted in response to this RFP will be made solely by ECA and are final. Dina Habib Powell, Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E6-18877 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as Amended by Public Law 104-13; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Tennessee Valley Authority. ACTION: Submission for OMB Review; comment request. SUMMARY: The proposed information collection described below will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C Chapter 35, as amended). The Tennessee Valley Authority is soliciting public comments on this proposed collection as provided by 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1). Requests for information, including copies of the information collection proposed and supporting documentation, should be directed to the Agency Clearance Officer: Alice D. Witt, Tennessee Valley Authority, 1101 Market Street (EB 5B), Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801;

(423)751-6832 (SC: 00001BH). Comments should be sent to OMB Office of Information & Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer for Tennessee Valley Authority, no later than December 8, 2006. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Type of Request:* Regular Submission, extension of currently approved collection. *Title of Information Collection:* TVA Accounts Payable Customer Satisfaction Survey. *Frequency of Use:* On occasion. *Small Business or Organizations Affected:* Yes. *Estimated Number of Annual Responses:* 2,000. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 200. *Estimated Average Burden Hours per Response:* 10 minutes. *Need for and Use of Information:* This information collection will be distributed by e-mail to TVA's suppliers that receive remittance information by e-mail. The information collected will be used to evaluate current performance of the Accounts Payable Department

(APD)which will identify areas for improvement and enable APD to provide better service to suppliers and facilitate commerce between TVA and its suppliers. Terry G. Tyler, General Manager, Architecture, Planning & Compliance, Information Services. [FR Doc. E6-18820 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8120-08-P TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as Amended by Public Law 104-13; Proposed Collection, Comment Request AGENCY: Tennessee Valley Authority. ACTION: Proposed collection; comment request. SUMMARY: The proposed information collection described below will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended). The Tennessee Valley Authority is soliciting public comments on this proposed collection as provided by 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1). Requests for information, including copies of the information collection proposed and supporting documentation, should be directed to the Agency Clearance Officer: Alice D. Witt, Tennessee Valley Authority, 1101 Market Street (EB 5B), Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801;

(423)751-6832 (SC: 000V7DC). Comments should be sent to the Agency Clearance Officer no later than January 8, 2007. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Type of Request:* Extension. *Title of Information Collection:* Section 26a Permit Application. *Frequency of Use:* On occasion. *Type of Affected Public:* Individuals or households, state or local governments, farms, businesses, or other for-profit Federal agencies or employees, non-profit institutions, small businesses or organizations. *Small Businesses or Organizations Affected:* Yes. *Federal Budget Functional Category Code:* 452. *Estimated Number of Annual Responses:* 4000. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 6000. *Estimated Average Burden Hours per Response:* 1.5. *Need For and Use of Information:* TVA Land Management activities and Section 26a of the Tennessee Valley Authority Act of 1933, as amended, require TVA to collect information relevant to projects that will impact TVA land and land rights and review and approve plans for the construction, operation, and maintenance of any dam, appurtenant works, or other obstruction affecting navigation, flood control, or public lands or reservations across, along, or in the Tennessee River or any of its tributaries. The information collected is used to assess the impact of the proposed project on TVA land or land rights and statutory TVA programs and determine if the project can be approved. Rules for implementation of TVA's Section 26a responsibilities are published in 18 CFR part 1304. Terry G. Tyler, General Manager, Architecture, Planning & Compliance, Information Services. [FR Doc. E6-18867 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8120-08-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [STB Docket No. AB-6 (Sub-No. 453X)] BNSF Railway Company—Abandonment Exemption—in King County, WA BNSF Railway Company

(BNSF)has filed a notice of exemption under 49 CFR Part 1152 Subpart F— *Exempt Abandonments* to abandon approximately 0.65 miles of rail line, extending between milepost 10.60 and milepost 11.25, near Wilburton, in King County, WA. The line traverses United States Postal Service Zip Code 98005. BNSF has certified that:

(1)No local traffic has moved over the line for at least 2 years;

(2)overhead traffic on the line will be rerouted;

(3)no formal complaint filed by a user of rail service on the line (or by a state or local government entity acting on behalf of such user) regarding cessation of service over the line either is pending with the Surface Transportation Board or with any U.S. District Court or has been decided in favor of complainant within the 2-year period; and

(4)the requirements at 49 CFR 1105.7 (environmental reports), 49 CFR 1105.8 (historic reports), 49 CFR 1105.11 (transmittal letter), 49 CFR 1105.12 (newspaper publication), and 49 CFR 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to governmental agencies) have been met. As a condition to this exemption, any employee adversely affected by the abandonment shall be protected under *Oregon Short Line R. Co.—Abandonment-Goshen* , 360 I.C.C. 91 (1979). To address whether this condition adequately protects affected employees, a petition for partial revocation under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) must be filed. Provided no formal expression of intent to file an offer of financial assistance

(OFA)has been received, this exemption will be effective on December 8, 2006, unless stayed pending reconsideration. Petitions to stay that do not involve environmental issues, 1 formal expressions of intent to file an OFA under 49 CFR 1152.27(c)(2), 2 and trail use/rail banking requests under 49 CFR 1152.29 must be filed by November 20, 2006. Petitions to reopen or requests for public use conditions under 49 CFR 1152.28 must be filed by November 28, 2006, with the Surface Transportation Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. 1 The Board will grant a stay if an informed decision on environmental issues (whether raised by a party or by the Board's Section of Environmental Analysis

(SEA)in its independent investigation) cannot be made before the exemption's effective date. *See Exemption of Out-of-Service Rail Lines,* 5 I.C.C.2d 377 (1989). Any request for a stay should be filed as soon as possible so that the Board may take appropriate action before the exemption's effective date. 2 Each OFA must be accompanied by the filing fee, which was increased to $1,300 effective on April 19, 2006. *See Regulations Governing Fees for Services Performed in Connection with Licensing and Related Services—2006 Update* , STB Ex Parte No. 542 (Sub-No. 13) (STB served Mar. 20, 2006). A copy of any petition filed with the Board should be sent to BNSF's representative: Sidney L. Strickland, Jr., Sidney Strickland and Associates, PLLC, 3050 K Street, NW., Suite 101, Washington, DC 20007. If the verified notice contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void *ab initio.* BNSF has filed a combined environmental and historic report which addresses the effects, if any, of the abandonment on the environment and historic resources. SEA will issue an environmental assessment

(EA)by November 13, 2006. Interested persons may obtain a copy of the EA by writing to SEA (Room 500, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, DC 20423-0001) or by calling SEA, at

(202)565-1539. [Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal Information Relay Service

(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8339.] Comments on environmental and historic preservation matters must be filed within 15 days after the EA becomes available to the public. Environmental, historic preservation, public use, or trail use/rail banking conditions will be imposed, where appropriate, in a subsequent decision. Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR 1152.29(e)(2), BNSF shall file a notice of consummation with the Board to signify that it has exercised the authority granted and fully abandoned the line. If consummation has not been effected by BNSF's filing of a notice of consummation by November 8, 2007, and there are no legal or regulatory barriers to consummation, the authority to abandon will automatically expire. Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at *http://www.stb.dot.gov.* Decided: October 30, 2006. By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of Proceedings. Vernon A. Williams, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18647 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4915-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [STB Finance Docket No. 34944] Portland & Western Railroad, Inc.—Temporary Trackage Rights Exemption—BNSF Railway Company Pursuant to a written trackage rights agreement, BNSF Railway Company

(BNSF)has agreed to grant temporary overhead trackage rights to Portland & Western Railroad, Inc. (PNWR), extending from the facilities of the Portland Terminal Railroad Company at Portland, OR, to Willbridge, OR, on

(a)BNSF main track #1 between milepost 0.69 and milepost 4.32 and

(b)BNSF main track #2 between milepost 0.91 and milepost 4.25 (including use of the crossover), a distance of approximately 3.6 miles. The transaction was scheduled to be consummated on or after October 30, 2006, and the temporary trackage rights are scheduled to expire on December 30, 2006. This transaction is related to two concurrently filed notices of exemption in STB Finance Docket No. 34945, *Portland & Western Railroad, Inc.—Temporary Trackage Rights Exemption—Union Pacific Railroad Company, and STB Finance Docket No. 34946,* *Portland & Western Railroad, Inc.—Temporary Trackage Rights Exemption—Portland Terminal Railroad Company* . In STB Finance Docket No. 34945, Union Pacific Railroad Company

(UP)has agreed to grant temporary overhead trackage rights to PNWR over a 50-mile line of railroad extending between milepost 0.0 on UP's Portland Subdivision at Portland, OR, and milepost 720.9 on UP's Brooklyn Subdivision at Labish, OR. In STB Finance Docket No. 34946, Portland Terminal Railroad Company has agreed to grant temporary overhead trackage rights to PNWR over a 1.5-mile line of railroad extending between milepost 0.91 on BNSF's Fallbridge Subdivision and milepost 0.0 on UP's Portland Subdivision, all located near Union Station in Portland, OR. The trackage rights in these proceedings will connect to make a continuous detour route between Willbridge and Labish, OR, that will allow PNWR to continue to handle traffic while its line is undergoing rehabilitation and reconstruction. As a condition to this exemption, any employees affected by the acquisition of the temporary trackage rights will be protected by the conditions imposed in *Norfolk and Western Ry. Co.—Trackage Rights—BN* , 354 I.C.C. 605 (1978), as modified in *Mendocino Coast Ry., Inc.—Lease and Operate* , 360 I.C.C. 653 (1980), and any employees affected by the discontinuance of those trackage rights will be protected by the conditions set out in *Oregon Short Line R. Co.—Abandonment—Goshen* , 360 I.C.C. 91 (1979). This notice is filed under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(8). If it contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void *ab initio* . Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not automatically stay the transaction. An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB Finance Docket No. 34944, must be filed with the Surface Transportation Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, a copy of each pleading must be served on Eric M. Hocky, Gollatz, Griffin & Ewing, P.C., Four Penn Center Plaza, Suite 200, 1600 John F. Kennedy Blvd., Philadelphia, PA 19103-2808. Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at *http://www.stb.dot.gov* . Decided November 1, 2006. By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of Proceedings. Vernon A. Williams, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18899 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4915-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request November 3, 2006. The Department of Treasury has submitted the following public information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 11000, 1750 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW. Washington, DC 20220. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before December 8, 2006 to be assured of consideration. Internal Revenue Service

(IRS)*OMB Number:* 1535-0105. *Type of Review:* Revision. *Title:* App. for recognition as natural guardian of minor not under legal guardianship & disposition of securities. *Form:* PD F 2481. *Description:* Used by natural guardian of minor to request disposition of securities. *Respondents:* Individuals and households. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 5 hours. *OMB Number:* 1535-0104. *Type of Review:* Revision. *Title:* Application by survivors for payment of bond or check issued under Armed Forces Leave Act of 1946. *Form:* PD F 2066. *Description:* Used by survivors for payment of bonds issued under Armed Forces Leave Act of 1946. *Respondents:* Individuals or households. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 75 hours. *OMB Number:* 1535-0068. *Type of Review:* Revision. *Title:* Regulations governing book-entry Treasury Bonds, Notes and Bills. *Description:* Beginning in 1986, U. S. Treasury bonds, notes and bills were offered exclusively in book-entry form. *Respondents:* Individuals or households. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 1 hours. *OMB Number:* 1535-0087. *Type of Review:* Revision. *Title:* Payment by banks and other financial institutions of U.S. Savings Bonds *Description:* Qualified financial institutions are authorized to redeem eligible savings bonds and receive settlement through FRB check collection system. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profits. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 56,227 hours. *OMB Number:* 1535-0009. *Type of Review:* Revision. *Title:* Request to Reissue U.S. Savings Bonds to a Personal Trust. *Form:* PD F 1851. *Description:* Used to request reissue of savings bonds in the name of a trustee of a personal trust estate. *Respondents:* Individuals or households. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 12,500 hours. *Clearance Officer:* Vicki S. Thorpe

(304)480-8150, Bureau of the Public Debt, 200 Third Street, Parkersburg, West Virginia 26106. *OMB Reviewer:* Alexander T. Hunt

(TTB)*OMB Number:* 1513-XXXX. *Type of Review:* New. *Title:* Application, Permit and Report—Wine and Beer (Puerto Rico)—Application, Permit and Report—Distilled Spirits Products (Puerto Rico). *Form:* TTB 5100.21 and 5110.51. *Description:* TTB Form 5100.21 is a permit to compute the tax on, tax pay, and withdraw shipments of wine or beer from Puerto Rico to the United States, as substantively required by 27 CFR 26.93. TTB Form 5110.51 is a permit to compute the tax on, tax pay, and withdraw shipments of distilled spirits products from Puerto Rico to the United States, as substantively required by 27 CFR 26.78. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profits. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 6 hours. *OMB Number:* 1513-0016. *Type of Review:* Reinstatement. *Title:* Drawback on Wines Exported. *Form:* TTB 5120.24. *Description:* Exporters of wines that were produced, packaged, manufactured, or bottled in the U.S. may file a claim for drawback of the taxes that have been paid or determined on the wine. This form enables TTB to protect the revenue and prevent fraudulent claims. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profits. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 94 hours. *Clearance Officer:* Frank Foote

(202)927-9347, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Room 200 East, 1310 G. Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. *OMB Reviewer:* Alexander T. Hunt

(202)395-7316, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. Michael A. Robinson, Treasury PRA Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E6-18849 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-31-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB), Treasury. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we invite comments on the proposed or continuing information collections listed below in this notice. DATES: We must receive your written comments on or before January 8, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may send comments to Mary A. Wood, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, at any of these addresses: • P.O. Box 14412, Washington, DC 20044-4412; • 202-927-8525 (facsimile); or • *formcomments@ttb.gov* (e-mail). Please send separate comments for each specific information collection listed below. You must reference the information collection's title, form or recordkeeping requirement number, and OMB number (if any) in your comment. If you submit your comment via facsimile, send no more than five 8.5 x 11 inch pages in order to ensure electronic access to our equipment. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To obtain additional information, copies of the information collection and its instructions, or copies of any comments received, contact Mary A. Wood, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, P.O. Box 14412, Washington, DC 20044-4412; or telephone 202-927-8210. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments The Department of the Treasury and its Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, as part of their continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invite the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the proposed or continuing information collections listed below in this notice, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). Comments submitted in response to this notice will be included or summarized in our request for Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)approval of the relevant information collection. All comments are part of the public record and subject to disclosure. Please not do include any confidential or inappropriate material in your comments. We invite comments on:

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

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

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

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

(e)estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide the requested information. Information Collections Open for Comment Currently, we are seeking comments on the following records and questionnaires: *Title:* Tobacco Products Manufacturers—Notice for Tobacco Products TTB REC 5210/12, and Records of Operations, TTB REC 5210/1. *OMB Number:* 1513-0091. *TTB Record Numbers:* 5210/12 and 5210/1. *Abstract:* Tobacco products manufacturers maintain a record system showing tobacco and tobacco products receipts, production, and dispositions which support removals subject to tax; transfer in bond; and inventory records. These records are vital to tax enforcement. *Current Actions:* There are no changes to this information collection, and it is being submitted for extension purposes only. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 180. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* One (1). *Title:* Recordkeeping for Tobacco Products and Cigarette Papers or Tubes Brought from Puerto Rico to the U.S. *OMB Number:* 1513-0108. *TTB Form or Record Number:* None. *Abstract:* The prescribed recordkeeping requirements apply to persons who ship tobacco products or cigarette papers or tubes from Puerto Rico to the United States. The records verify the amount of taxes to be paid and that any required bond is sufficient to cover unpaid liabilities. *Current Actions:* There are no changes to this information collection, and it is being submitted for extension purposes only. *Type of Review:* Extension. *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 4. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* One (1). *Title:* Customer Survey Questionnaires for Applicants, Permittees, Claimants, and Others Doing Business with TTB. *OMB Number:* 1513-XXXX (To be assigned). *TTB Form or Record Number:* None. *Abstract:* TTB, in an effort to improve its Customer Service, uses these questionnaires to keep track of its customer service quality and progress, as well as to identify potential needs, problems, and opportunities for improvement. These questionnaires will be used primarily in telephone interviews, but may be used on other occasions as well. The respondents are applicants, permittees, and claimants pursuant to the Federal Alcohol Administration Act, the Internal Revenue Code, and the TTB regulations. There is no cost to respondents other than their time, and responding to these customer service questionnaires is voluntary. *Current Actions:* This is a new collection and it is being submitted for approval. *Type of Review:* Regular (New Collection). *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 2,500. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 625. Dated: November 2, 2006. Francis W. Foote, Director, Regulations and Rulings Division. [FR Doc. E6-18878 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-31-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Fiscal Service Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds: Name Change: American Re-Insurance Company (NAIC #10227) AGENCY: Financial Management Service, Fiscal Service, Department of the Treasury. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This is Supplement No. 3 to the Treasury Department Circular 570, 2006 Revision, published June 30, 2006, at 71 FR 37694. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Surety Bond Branch at

(202)874-6850. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: American Re-Insurance Company, a Delaware corporation, has formally changed its name to Munich Reinsurance American, Inc., effective September 5, 2006. A Certificate of Authority as an acceptable surety on Federal bonds is hereby issued under 31 U.S.C. 9305 to Munich Reinsurance American, Inc., Wilmington, Delaware. This new Certificate replaces the Certificate of Authority issued to this company under its former name. The underwriting limitation of $304,138,000 established for this company as of July 1, 2006, remains unchanged until June 30, 2007. Federal bond-approving officers should annotate their reference copies of the Treasury Department Circular 570 (“Circular”), 2006 Revision, to reflect this change. Certificates of Authority expire on June 30th each year, unless revoked prior to that date. The Certificates are subject to subsequent annual renewal as long as the company remains qualified ( *see* 31 CFR part 223). A list of qualified companies is published annually as of July 1, in the Circular, which outlines details as to underwriting limitations, areas in which companies are licensed to transact surety business, and other information. The Circular may be viewed and downloaded through the Internet at *http://www.fms.treas.gov/c570.* Questions concerning this Notice may be directed to the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Financial Management Service, Financial Accounting and Services Division, Surety Bond Branch, 3700 East-West Highway, Room 6F01, Hyattsville, MD 20782. Dated: November 1, 2006. Vivian L. Cooper, Director, Financial Accounting and Services Division, Financial Management Service. [FR Doc. 06-9107 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 22

Traces to 22 documents

U.S. Code

CFR

DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Notices

public-private-law

No Stolen Trademarks Honored in America Act of 2023
Public Law 118-137

22 references not yet in our index

17 CFR 240.17
Pub. L. 106-102
113 Stat. 1338
17 CFR 240.15
17 CFR 240.19
15 USC 78
79 Stat. 985
Pub. L. 104-13
5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1)
18 CFR 1304
49 CFR 1152
49 CFR 1105.7
49 CFR 1105.8
49 CFR 1105.11
49 CFR 1105.12
49 CFR 1152.50(d)(1)
49 CFR 1152.27(c)(2)
49 CFR 1152.29
49 CFR 1152.28
49 CFR 1152.29(e)(2)
49 CFR 1180.2(d)(8)
31 CFR 223

Citation graph

cites case law

Notices

Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) for an exemption from section 15(a) of the Act and rule 18f-2 under the Act, as well as certain disclosure requirements

Cite17 CFR 240.17

Pub. L.Pub. L. 106-102

Stat.113 Stat. 1338

Cites 44 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources