Rules and Regulations. Notice of meetings

21,750 words·~99 min read·/register/2007/05/21/07-2498

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

BILLING CODE 7535-01-M THE NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES Meetings of Humanities Panel AGENCY: The National Endowment for the Humanities. ACTION: Notice of meetings. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), notice is hereby given that the following meetings of Humanities Panels will be held at the Old Post Office, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20506. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather C. Gottry, Acting Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Endowment for the Humanities, Washington, DC 20506; telephone

(202)606-8322. Hearing-impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter may be obtained by contacting the Endowment's TDD terminal on

(202)606-8282. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed meetings are for the purpose of panel review, discussion, evaluation and recommendation on applications for financial assistance under the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965, as amended, including discussion of information given in confidence to the agency by the grant applicants. Because the proposed meetings will consider information that is likely to disclose trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential and/or information of a personal nature the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, pursuant to authority granted me by the Chairman's Delegation of Authority to Close Advisory Committee meetings, dated July 19, 1993, I have determined that these meetings will be closed to the public pursuant to subsections

(c)(4), and

(6)of section 552b of Title 5, United States Code. 1. *Date:* June 1, 2007. *Time:* 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. *Room:* 415. *Program:* This meeting will review applications for The IMLS/NEH Digital Partnership Advancing Knowledge I, submitted to the Division of Preservation and Access, at the March 27, 2007 deadline. 2. *Date:* June 12, 2007. *Time:* 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. *Room:* 415. *Program:* This meeting will review applications for The IMLS/NEH Digital Partnership Advancing Knowledge II, submitted to the Division of Preservation and Access, at the March 27, 2007 deadline. Heather C. Gottry, Acting Advisory Committee, Management Officer. [FR Doc. E7-9717 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7536-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-346, 50-440, 50-334, and 50-412; License Nos. NPF-3, NPF-58, DPR-66, NPF-73; EA 07-123] In the Matter of First Energy Nuclear Operating Company—Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant, Perry Nuclear Power Plant, and Beaver Valley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2; Demand for Information I FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC or licensee) is the holder of four NRC Facility Operating Licenses issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR part 50, which authorizes the operation of the specifically named facilities in accordance with the conditions specified in each license. License No. NPF-3 was issued on April 22, 1977, to operate the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station (Davis-Besse). License No. NPF-58 was issued on November 13, 1986, to operate the Perry Nuclear Power Plant. Licenses No. DPR-66 and NPF-73 to operate the Beaver Valley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 were issued on July 2, 1976, and August 14,1987, respectively. The facilities are located on the licensee's properties near Toledo and Painesville, Ohio, for the Davis-Besse and Perry Plants, respectively, and near McCandless, Pennsylvania, for the Beaver Valley Nuclear Plant. II On March 8, 2004, the NRC issued a Confirmatory Order to FENOC and approved restart of the Davis-Besse Plant following substantial licensee action to evaluate and develop appropriate corrective actions for the technical and programmatic issues that were associated with the 2002 reactor pressure vessel head degradation event. On April 21, 2005, the NRC issued a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties in the amount of 5,450,000 dollars involving violations associated with the 2002 Davis-Besse reactor pressure vessel head degradation event and the root causes for the event. On September 14, 2005, FENOC responded to the Notice of Violation, paid the proposed civil penalty and addressed each of the violations cited. Its response also addressed FENOC's assessment of the root cause for each violation. On January 23, 2006, FENOC provided a supplemental reply to the Notice of Violation. FENOC obtained a report from its contractor, Exponent Failure Analysis Associates and Altran Solutions Corporations (Exponent), dated December 2006, prepared in connection with its claim against Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), which included an updated analysis of the timeline and root cause for the 2002 Davis-Besse reactor pressure vessel head degradation event. A significant conclusion of this analysis was a determination by Exponent that the time period between the beginning of substantial leakage from the reactor pressure vessel head nozzle causing the development of the large cavity next to the nozzle may have been as short as four months. Previously, FENOC had conducted its own technical and programmatic root cause evaluations of the event and concluded that the reactor pressure vessel head cavity was the result of ongoing nozzle leakage which had gone undetected for more than four years. FENOC also obtained a second report, dated in December 2006, from another contractor, entitled, “Report on Reactor Pressure Vessel Wastage at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant.” This second report included conclusions that appeared to be inconsistent with FENOC's previous communications with the NRC and the April 21, 2005, Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties associated with the 2002 Davis-Besse reactor pressure vessel degradation event. In February 2007, NEIL sent to FENOC a letter identifying what NEIL believed to be potential safety concerns raised by the Exponent report conclusions. Upon receipt of the NEIL letter, the Davis-Besse plant staff generated a condition report in its corrective action program to document the issue. During March 2007, the NRC held several conference calls with the Davis-Besse staff to obtain additional information regarding the licensee's assessment of the concerns raised in the NEIL letter and to understand the licensee's planned actions to address the concerns. By letter dated April 2, 2007, the NRC requested the licensee to respond, in writing, to four questions regarding information and conclusions presented in the Exponent Report to assist the NRC in understanding the assumptions, analysis, and conclusions of the Exponent Report, and to confirm the information provided during the March 2007 conference calls. By letter dated May 2, 2007, FENOC provided a written response to the NRC's questions. In its response, FENOC stated, among other things, that the Exponent Report set forth an informed analysis that more accurately characterizes the timeline of the reactor head degradation event based upon the use of more recently available test data in conjunction with detailed analytical modeling. FENOC's response did not indicate whether it had completed a comprehensive review of the Exponent Report relative to its previous root cause reports. The information provided by the licensee regarding the foregoing did not provide the NRC with sufficient information to determine if FENOC had conducted a prompt and thorough review of the Exponent Report. In particular, the NRC needs additional information to determine whether FENOC conducted a timely and comprehensive analysis of the assumptions and conclusions of the Exponent Report to assess their accuracy relative to the technical and programmatic root cause reports previously developed by FENOC and an assessment of whether the NRC should have been notified regarding its conclusions. In addition, FENOC did not provide the NRC with sufficient information to determine if FENOC endorsed the conclusions of the second contractor report and, if so, the effect such positions may have regarding its earlier responses to the April 2005 enforcement actions. In light of the foregoing, further information is needed for the Commission to determine whether an Order or other action should be taken pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, to provide reasonable assurance that FENOC will continue to operate its licensed facilities in accordance with the terms of its licenses and the Commission's regulations; in particular, to assure that: 1. FENOC demonstrates an appropriate focus, centered on the timely and critical evaluation of information developed internally by FENOC, by its contractors, and by industry sources which may affect safety assessments of its operating nuclear fleet; 2. FENOC promptly communicates to the NRC all information that it develops, receives, or becomes aware of that has the potential to have a significant impact on public health and safety; 3. FENOC has completed a comprehensive assessment of the assumptions and conclusions of the Exponent Report and has determined whether the assumptions and conclusions are consistent with the past operational experience at the Davis-Besse Plant, the assumptions of the previous technical and non-technical root cause reports developed by FENOC as a part of its assessment of the 2002 reactor pressure vessel head degradation event; and the corrective actions developed and implemented by FENOC and relied upon by the NRC as a basis for the restart of the Davis-Besse Plant. 4. FENOC has completed a comprehensive assessment of the conclusions of its contractor's report, entitled, “Report on Reactor Pressure Vessel Wastage at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant,” and has determined whether the root cause reports and licensee event reports related to the 2002 reactor pressure vessel head degradation event and the responses to the NRC Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties dated April 21, 2005, should be updated to ensure they are complete and accurate in all material respects. III Accordingly, pursuant to sections 161c, 161o, 182 and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.204 and 10 CFR 50.54(f), in order to determine whether your licenses should be modified, suspended or revoked, or other action should be taken, the licensee is required to submit to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, with copies to the Assistant General Counsel for Materials Litigation and Enforcement at the same address, to the Regional Administrator, NRC Region III, 2443 Warrenville, Road, Suite 210, Lisle, IL 60532-4352 and to the Resident Inspectors, within 30 days of the date of this Demand for Information the following information, in writing, and under oath or affirmation: A. A detailed discussion of the process used, the specific information evaluated, and the conclusions reached as a part of FENOC's assessment of the Exponent Report, upon receipt or subsequently, to determine if the Exponent Report assumptions, analyses, conclusions, or other related information, should have been reported to the NRC in a more prompt manner. Your response shall include sufficient information for the NRC to assess how FENOC evaluated the significant differences between the crack growth and leakage timelines developed in the Exponent Report and previous root cause reports. B. A detailed discussion of the differences in assumptions, analyses, conclusions, and other related information of the Exponent Report and previous technical and programmatic root cause reports, developed following the 2002 Davis-Besse reactor pressure vessel head degradation event. Your response shall address, among other matters you believe warranted, differences between the operational experience data, such as the origin and presence of boric acid deposits and corrosion products on air coolers, radiation filters, the reactor vessel head, and other components in the containment, and the Exponent Report assumptions for these items. Your response shall also indicate if differences in the Exponent Report assumptions, analyses, information, or conclusions and previous root cause reports demonstrate a need for any new or different corrective actions relative to the 2002 Davis-Besse reactor pressure vessel head degradation event and related issues. Your response shall also address the impact on the continued effectiveness of your corrective actions. C. With regard to the “Report on Reactor Pressure Vessel Wastage at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant,” dated December 2006, indicate if FENOC endorses the report's conclusions. If so, your response shall set forth your assessment of whether this position is in conflict with previous root cause and licensee event reports regarding the 2002 Davis-Besse reactor pressure vessel head degradation event and FENOC's responses to the NRC Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties, dated April 21, 2005. Your response shall also address the impact on the continued effectiveness of your corrective actions. After reviewing your response, the NRC will determine whether further action is necessary to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Dated this 14th day of May, 2007. Cynthia A. Carpenter, Director, Office of Enforcement. [FR Doc. E7-9715 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE Generalized System of Preferences (GSP): Notice Regarding the Initiation of the 2007 Annual GSP Product and Country Eligibility Practices Review and Change in Deadlines for Filing Certain Petitions AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Notice and solicitation for public petition. SUMMARY: This notice announces that the Office of the United States Trade Representative

(USTR)will receive petitions in 2007 to modify the list of products that are eligible for duty-free treatment under the GSP program, and to modify the GSP status of certain GSP beneficiary developing countries because of country practices. This notice further determines that the deadline for submission of product petitions, other than those requesting competitive need limitation

(CNL)waivers, and country practice petitions for the 2007 Annual GSP Product and Country Eligibility Practices Review is 5 p.m., June 22, 2007. The deadline for submission of product petitions requesting CNL waivers is 5 p.m., November 16, 2007. The list of product petitions and country practice petitions accepted for review will be announced in the **Federal Register** at later dates. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact the GSP Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee, Office of the United States Trade Representative, 1724 F Street, NW., Room F-220, Washington, DC 20508. The telephone number is

(202)395-6971, the facsimile number is

(202)395-9481, and the e-mail address is *FR0711@USTR.EOP.GOV* . Public versions of all documents relating to this Review will be available for examination approximately 30 days after the pertinent due date, by appointment, in the USTR public reading room, 1724 F Street, NW., Washington, DC. Availability of documents may be ascertained, and appointments may be made from 9:30 a.m. to noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, by calling

(202)395-6186. 2007 Annual GSP Review The GSP regulations (15 CFR part 2007) provide the timetable for conducting an annual review, unless otherwise specified by **Federal Register** notice. Notice is hereby given that, in order to be considered in the 2007 Annual GSP Product and Country Eligibility Practices Review, all petitions to modify the list of articles eligible for duty-free treatment under GSP or to review the GSP status of any beneficiary developing country, with the exception of petitions requesting CNL waivers, must be received by the GSP Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee no later than 5 p.m. on June 22, 2007. Petitions requesting CNL waivers must be received by the GSP Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee no later than 5 p.m. on November 16, 2007 in order to be considered in the 2007 Annual Review. Petitions submitted after the respective deadlines will not be considered for review. Interested parties, including foreign governments, may submit petitions to:

(1)Designate additional articles as eligible for GSP benefits, including to designate articles as eligible for GSP benefits only for countries designated as least-developed beneficiary developing countries, or only for countries designated as beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA);

(2)withdraw, suspend or limit the application of duty-free treatment accorded under the GSP with respect to any article, either for all beneficiary developing countries, least-developed beneficiary developing countries or beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries, or for any of these countries individually;

(3)waive the “competitive need limitations” for individual beneficiary developing countries with respect to specific GSP-eligible articles (these limits do not apply to either least-developed beneficiary developing countries or AGOA beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries); and

(4)otherwise modify GSP coverage. As specified in 15 CFR 2007.1, all product petitions must include a detailed description of the product and the subheading of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under which the product is classified. Further, product petitions requesting CNL waivers for GSP-eligible articles from beneficiary developing countries that exceed the CNLs in 2007 must be filed in the 2007 Annual Review. In order to allow petitioners an opportunity to review additional 2007 U.S. import statistics, these petitions may be filed after June 22, 2007, but must be received on or before the November 16, 2007, deadline described above in order to be considered in the 2007 Annual Review. Copies will be made available for public inspection after the November 16, 2007, deadline. Any person may also submit petitions to review the designation of any beneficiary developing country, including any least-developed beneficiary developing country, with respect to any of the designation criteria listed in sections 502(b) or 502(c) of the Trade Act (19 U.S.C. 2462(b) and (c)) (petitions to review the designation of beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries are considered in the Annual Review of the AGOA, a separate administrative process not governed by the GSP regulations). Such petitions must comply with the requirements of 15 CFR 2007.0(b). Requirements for Submissions All such submissions must conform to the GSP regulations set forth at 15 CFR part 2007, except as modified below. These regulations are reprinted in the “U.S. Generalized System of Preferences Guidebook” (February 2007) (“GSP Guidebook”), available at *http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Trade_Development/Preference_Programs/GSP/asset_upload_file412_8359.pdf* . Any person or party making a submission is strongly advised to review the GSP regulations. Submissions that do not provide the information required by sections 2007.0 and 2007.1 of the GSP regulations will not be accepted for review, except upon a detailed showing in the submission that the petitioner made a good faith effort to obtain the information required. Petitions with respect to waivers of the “competitive need limitations” must meet the information requirements for product addition requests in section 2007.1(c) of the GSP regulations. A model petition format is available from the GSP Subcommittee and is included in the GSP Guidebook. Petitioners are requested to use this model petition format so as to ensure that all information requirements are met. Furthermore, interested parties submitting petitions that request action with respect to specific products should list on the first page of the petition the following information after typing “2007 Annual GSP Review”:

(1)The requested action;

(2)the HTSUS subheading in which the product is classified; and

(3)if applicable, the beneficiary developing country. Petitions and requests must be submitted, in English, to the Chairman of the GSP Subcommittee, Trade Policy Staff Committee. Submissions in response to this notice will be available for public inspection by appointment with the staff of the USTR Public Reading Room, except for information granted “business confidential” status pursuant to 15 CFR 2003.6. If the submission contains business confidential information, a non-confidential version of the submission must also be submitted that indicates where confidential information was redacted by inserting asterisks where material was deleted. In addition, the confidential submission must be clearly marked “BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL” in large, bold letters at the top and bottom of each and every page of the document. The public version that does not contain business confidential information must also be clearly marked in large, bold letters at the top and bottom of each and every page (either “PUBLIC VERSION” or “NON-CONFIDENTIAL”). Documents that are submitted without any marking might not be accepted or will be considered public documents. In order to facilitate prompt consideration of submissions, USTR requires electronic mail (e-mail) submissions in response to this notice. Hand-delivered submissions will not be accepted. E-mail submissions should be single copy transmissions in English with the total submission including attachments not to exceed 30 pages in 12-point type and 3 megabytes as a digital file attached to an e-mail transmission. Submissions should use the following e-mail subject line: “2007 Annual GSP Review-Petition.” Documents must be submitted as either WordPerfect (“.WPD”), MSWord (“.DOC”), text (“.TXT”), or Adobe (“PDF”) file. Documents cannot be submitted as electronic image files or contain embedded images (for example, “.JPG”, “.TIF”, “.BMP”, or “.GIF”). Supporting documentation submitted as spreadsheets are acceptable as Quattro Pro or Excel, pre-formatted for printing on 8 1/2 × 11 inch paper. To the extent possible, any data attachments to the submission should be included in the same file as the submission itself, and not as separate files. E-mail submissions should not include separate cover letters or messages in the message area of the e-mail; information that might appear in any cover letter should be included directly in the attached file containing the submission itself, including identifying information on the sender, organization name, address, telephone number, and e-mail address. The electronic mail address for these submissions is *FR0711@USTR.EOP.GOV* . For any document containing business confidential information submitted as an electronic attached file to an e-mail transmission, in addition to the proper marking at the top and bottom of each page as previously specified, the file name of the business confidential version should begin with the characters “BC-”, and the file name of the public version should begin with the characters “P-”. The “P-” or “BC-” should be followed by the name of the person or party (government, company, union, association, etc.) submitting the petition. Documents not submitted in accordance with these instructions may not be considered in this review. Marideth Sandler, Executive Director, GSP Program, Chairman, GSP Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee. [FR Doc. E7-9756 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190-W7-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meetings Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94-409, that the Securities and Exchange Commission will hold the following meetings during the week of May 21, 2007: Open Meetings will be held on Wednesday, May 23, 2007 at 9 a.m., Thursday, May 24, 2007 at 9 a.m. and Friday, May 25, 2007 at 9 a.m., in the Auditorium, Room L-002. A Closed Meeting will be held on Thursday, May 24, 2007 at 2 p.m. Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters may also be present. The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (4), (5), (7), (8), (9)(B), and

(10)and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (4), (5), (7), (8), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting. Commissioner Atkins, as duty officer, voted to consider the items listed for the closed meeting in closed session. The subject matter of the Open Meeting scheduled for Wednesday, May 23, 2007 at 9 a.m. will be: 1. The Commission will consider whether to adopt interpretive guidance for management regarding its evaluation and assessment of internal control over financial reporting. The Commission will also consider whether to adopt amendments to Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(c) and 15d-15(c) that would make it clear that an evaluation that complies with the Commission's interpretive guidance would satisfy the annual management evaluation required by those rules. In addition, the Commission will consider whether to adopt amendments to Rules 1-02(a)(2) and 2-02(f) of Regulation S-X to require the expression of a single opinion directly on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting by the auditor in its attestation report. Finally, the Commission will consider whether to adopt amendments to Exchange Act Rule 12b-2 and Rule 1-02 of Regulation S-X to define certain terms. 2. The Commission will consider a number of rule proposals addressing the registration and disclosure requirements for smaller companies, as well as private offerings of securities, including whether: • To propose amendments to increase the number of companies eligible for the scaled disclosure and reporting requirements for smaller reporting companies; • To propose amendments to expand the eligibility requirements of Form S-3 and Form F-3 to permit registration of primary offerings by companies with a public float of less than $75 million, subject to restrictions on the amount of securities sold in any one-year period; • To propose exemptions from the registration requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for grants of compensatory employee stock options by non-reporting companies; • To propose a new Regulation D exemption for offers and sales of securities to a newly defined subset of “accredited investors,” as well as to propose revisions to the Regulation D definition of “accredited investor,” disqualification provisions, and integration safe harbor and to provide interpretive guidance regarding integration; • To propose revisions to Form D and mandate electronic filing of Form D; and • To propose amendments to Rule 144 to revise the holding period for the resale of restricted securities, simplify compliance for non-affiliates, revise the Form 144 filing thresholds, and codify certain staff interpretations, as well as to propose amendments to Rule 145. 3. The Commission will consider whether to adopt rules to implement provisions of the Credit Rating Agency Reform Act of 2006. The subject matter of the Open Meeting scheduled for Thursday, May 24, 2007 at 9 a.m. will be: The Commission will hold a roundtable discussion regarding proxy voting mechanics. The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, May 24, 2007 at 2 p.m. will be. Formal orders of investigations; Institution and settlement of injunctive actions; Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings of an enforcement nature; Resolution of litigation claims; Regulatory matter regarding a financial institution; and Other matters related to enforcement proceedings. The subject matter of the Open Meeting scheduled for Friday, May 25, 2007 at 9 a.m. will be: The Commission will hold a roundtable discussion regarding proposals of shareholders. At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, please contact: The Office of the Secretary at

(202)551-5400. Dated: May 16, 2007. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-9743 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-55762; File No. SR-Amex-2007-47] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Change the Method By Which Specialists on the Exchange Execute Odd-Lot Market Orders Under Rule 205—AEMI May 15, 2007. 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 May 11, 2007, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. Amex has filed this proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(5) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(5). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to adopt changes to Rule 205—AEMI in order to change the method by which specialists on the Exchange execute odd-lot market orders. The text of the proposed rule change is available on Amex's Web site at *http://www.amex.com* , at the Exchange'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, Amex included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. Amex has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange is currently operating, and has adopted rules in connection with the operation of, its new hybrid market trading platform for equity products and exchange-traded funds, designated as AEMI SM (the Auction and Electronic Market Integration platform). Rule 205—AEMI (“Manner of Executing Odd-Lot Orders”) requires the specialist for a relevant security to be the contra-party for executions of any odd-lot orders in that security received by AEMI and specifies, in relevant part, the pricing at which such executions must occur. In the case of odd-lot market orders that are not executed within 30 seconds of receipt by AEMI, the specialist is currently required to execute such orders at the price of the qualifying national best bid or offer (“NBBO”). In order to ensure a fair and orderly market, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 205—AEMI to provide for such odd-lot market orders to now be executed at the specialist's quote, rather than the NBBO.

(i)How Rule 205—AEMI Works Today Rule 205—AEMI(b)(i)-(iii) currently requires the specialist to execute a market odd-lot order at the price of a subsequent round-lot execution that occurs in the subject security on the Exchange for 30 seconds after the odd-lot order is entered. However, a market odd-lot order is executed at this round-lot price only to the extent that there are a sufficient number of shares subsequently transacted in round-lots on the Exchange within that 30 second window to match any imbalance between the pending odd-lot market buy and sell orders. If there are an insufficient number of shares in round-lot executions within that 30 seconds from which to benchmark the market odd-lot execution price of the imbalance, Rule 205—AEMI(b)(iv) dictates that the NBBO be used as the default price at which the specialist is required to execute. 5

(ii)The Identified Deficiency in Rule 205—AEMI 5 Applying the rule, assume AEMI receives market odd-lot buy orders aggregating 1,500 shares and market odd-lot sell orders aggregating 3,500 shares in a security. The next and only round-lot execution on the Amex within the next 30 seconds is 500 shares at $10, and, at the expiration of the 30 seconds, the NBB is 100 shares at $10.50 on NYSE. The specialist is required in time priority of receipt of the odd-lot orders into AEMI to: • Sell/buy an equal number of shares on each side of the odd-lot market at $10, which clears the 1,500 shares of odd-lot market buy orders and leaves an imbalance of 2,000 of the original 3,500 shares of odd-lot market sell orders. • In response to the remaining 2,000 shares of odd-lot market sell orders, buy a maximum of 500 shares at $10 because that is the total size of subsequent round-lot transactions within the 30-second window. (This assumes that the remaining odd-lot sell orders with greatest time priority total 500 shares exactly. If a partial execution would result by stopping the specialist from buying at $10 once the 500 share threshold was reached, then the specialist could buy more than 500 shares at $10 so as to permit execution in full of the last odd-lot order at that price. *See* Rule 205—AEMI(b)(ii).) • At the expiration of 30 seconds, purchase the 1,500 shares remaining from the odd-lot sell orders at $10.50 (the NBB), even though the NBB was for only 100 shares and might not reflect the price at which the specialist would or should otherwise be willing to purchase 1,500 shares. It has become apparent to the Exchange that the current version of Rule 205—AEMI (insofar as it forces the specialist to execute any unexecuted imbalance in odd-lot orders at the NBBO) provides too much opportunity for manipulation to the detriment of both the specialists and accuracy in pricing. In practice, the Exchange has recently observed a high number of odd-lot market orders in less liquid securities and believes that this is a direct result of the rule's guarantee of execution at the NBBO irrespective of whether the size or timeliness of the NBBO is comparable to those of the odd-lot orders on the Exchange. The Exchange is concerned that off-floor participants may be breaking up larger round-lots into multiple odd-lots to take advantage of NBBO pricing on the Exchange where such pricing would be unattainable if the larger orders were submitted and price discovery was possible. This behavior would violate Exchange rules 6 but unfortunately can be ascertained only via case-by-case post-trade investigation. Additionally, in the case of very highly-priced, yet thinly traded, securities, specialists are bearing inappropriate burdens as odd-lot dealers as well. Below are two examples of what can occur: 6 *See* Rule 4 (generally prohibiting manipulation of securities prices) and Rule 208 (applicable in AEMI via Rule 1A-AEMI(d)), entitled “Bunching of Odd-Lot Orders,” which provides in relevant part: When a person gives, either for his own account, for various accounts in which he has an actual monetary interest, or for accounts over which such person is exercising investment discretion, buy or sell odd-lot orders which aggregate one or more round-lots, a member or member organization shall not accept such orders for execution unless they are, as far as possible, consolidated into round-lots, except that selling orders marked “long” or “short exempt” need not be so consolidated with selling orders marked “short.” • Assume that an illiquid security has an average daily volume of 15,000 shares. Assume also that the NBBO is $5.00 bid for 100 shares on NASDAQ and 500 shares offered at $5.10 on NYSE. The liquidity around the NBBO is very thin, and no round-lot executions have taken place over the last four hours, during which period Amex nonetheless receives many odd-lot market orders. In accordance with Rule 205—AEMI, each odd-lot order is executed after 30 seconds against the specialist at the NBBO automatically, although the specialist is not quoting at the NBBO, the NBBO has not changed, and no round-lot trades have occurred in the marketplace. Over the course of the four hours, the specialist is forced to purchase an aggregate of 10,553 shares in odd-lots, each at a price of $5.00, even though grossly disproportionate to the 100 share order size connected to the $5.00 NBB, the overall activity in the marketplace, and the likely lower value at which an equivalent aggregate volume of round lots would have transacted in such an illiquid market. As such, the specialist is forced to bear an inappropriate amount of risk of loss as odd-lot dealer because, rather than price discovery being permitted to occur as would occur with round-lot quotes, the specialist is forced to purchase all of the odd-lots at the stale NBBO price. • Assume a very highly-priced thinly-traded security with an NBBO of 100 shares bid for $800 on NASDAQ and 100 shares offered at $806 on NYSE. Because of the high price of the shares, round-lot executions are infrequent and no round-lot executions have taken place on Amex over the last four hours. Nonetheless, Amex receives multiple odd-lot market sale orders aggregating 367 shares over that time period. In accordance with Rule 205—AEMI, each odd-lot order is executed after 30 seconds against the specialist at $800, and, over the course of the four hours, the specialist is forced to purchase an aggregate of 367 shares in odd-lots at $800 per share for $293,600. Because of the high stock price, the absence of price discovery amplifies the costs to the specialist in the event of disparity between the stale NBBO and the true value of the security. Had the mandatory $800 bid been reduced by a mere 0.5% (to $796)—to reflect what a hypothetical reasonable investor would pay for a thinly-traded $800 security with an imbalance of sell interest in the market—the aggregate outlay would be $1468 less.

(iii)The Solution As described above, the Exchange believes that the way odd-lot market orders are currently being executed today (only insofar as the NBBO price is imposed under Rule 205—AEMI(b)(i)-(iv) as a default price upon the specialists in the absence of a sufficient number of round-lot order executions on the Exchange within 30 seconds of each odd-lot market order) is inconsistent with the specialists' obligations to quote and maintain a fair and orderly market. Moreover, odd-lot orders are not subject to the Limit Order Display Rule 7 or Order Protection Rule 8 under Regulation NMS and do not have the same standing as round-lot orders with regard to price protection. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to change the default price in Rule 205—AEMI(b) under which specialists are required to execute odd-lot market orders not executed within 30 seconds after receipt by AEMI from the NBBO to the specialist's own best bid or offer. 7 17 CFR 242.604. 8 17 CFR 242.611. The Exchange believes that this proposal properly balances a more reasonable level of risk exposure for the specialists with their obligation to trade odd lots and deliver timely executions to investors. In particular, the proposal would permit price discovery to occur (via programmed automated adjustments flowing from executions against the specialist's quote) while still requiring the specialist to provide timely executions of odd-lot market orders. As such, executions of odd lots on the Exchange will be more likely to occur at prices which reflect the most current market conditions. In this regard, the Exchange points out that specialists are specifically required by Exchange rules to formulate quotes to avoid wide swings in the pricing of prior and subsequent transactions, 9 so the substitution of the specialist's quote for the NBBO in Rule 205—AEMI is not intended to, and should not result in, unreasonably priced executions of odd-lot market orders. 9 Commentary .03 to Rule 170—AEMI provides in relevant part: “A specialist's quotation, made for his own account, should be such that a transaction effected at his quoted price or within the quoted spread * * * would bear a proper relation to preceding transactions and anticipated succeeding transactions or, in the case of ETFs or other derivatively priced securities, to the value of underlying or related securities.” The proposed rule change would result in the following textual changes in Rule 205—AEMI: • Substitution of the words “specialist's best bid” and “specialist's best offer” for “qualified national best bid” and “qualified national best offer” where such terms appear in the rule. • Removal of Commentary .04 to the rule, which deals solely with explaining the definition of “qualified national best bid or offer,” which will no longer be relevant to Rule 205—AEMI. 2. Statutory Basis The proposed rule change is designed to be consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 10 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 11 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received from Members, Participants or Others No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the 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)have the effect of limiting the access to or availability of an existing order entry or trading system of the Exchange, the foregoing rule change has become effective immediately pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 12 and Rule 19b-4(f)(5) thereunder. 13 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. 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(5). 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 at *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml;* or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-Amex-2007-47 on the subject line. Paper comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Amex-2007-47. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Amex-2007-47 and should be submitted on or before June 11, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-9659 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-55764; File No. SR-ISE-2007-18] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to Information Regarding Customer Interest on the Book May 15, 2007. I. Introduction On March 5, 2007, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (“ISE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 a proposed rule change to allow the ISE to make available to all ISE members information regarding the quantity of public customer contracts included in the ISE's highest bid and lowest offer. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on April 12, 2007. 3 The Commission received no comments regarding the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55589 (April 5, 2007), 72 FR 18498. II. Description of the Proposal Currently, the ISE provides information regarding the quantity of public customer contracts at the ISE's best bid and best offer (“BBO”) only to Primary Market Makers (“PMMs”). The ISE proposes to adopt ISE Rule 713, Supplementary Material .04, to allow the ISE to make such information available to all ISE members. According to the ISE, the Chicago Board Options Exchange (“CBOE”) currently provides its members with information regarding customer interest at the CBOE's BBO. The ISE believes that it is necessary to provide its members with similar information to remain competitive with the CBOE. In addition, the ISE notes that the information would allow an ISE member to know the number of customer contracts it would need to satisfy before the member could cross a large block-sized order. The ISE believes that such information is particularly useful for members seeking to execute larger-sized orders through the ISE's block and facilitation mechanisms. 4 4 *See* ISE Rule 716. In addition, the proposal corrects several cross-references in ISE Rule 713(a). III. Discussion The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 5 Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 6 which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Specifically, the proposal will allow the ISE to make available to all ISE members information regarding customer interest at the ISE's BBO that currently is available only to PMMs. In addition, the proposal will allow the ISE to provide its members with the same customer interest information that CBOE currently makes available to its members. 5 In approving this proposed rule change the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). IV. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 7 that the proposed rule change (SR-ISE-2007-18) is approved. 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 8 8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-9664 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-55768; File No. SR-NYSE-2007-24] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to Rule 13 (Definitions of Orders) To Establish the New Order Type Called Do Not Ship May 15, 2007. 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 April 20, 2007, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed rule change. The Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change on May 11, 2007. The proposed rule change, as amended, is described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the NYSE. The Exchange filed the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend its Rule 13 (Definitions of Orders) to establish the new order type called Do Not Ship (“DNS”). The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, on the Exchange's Web site at *http://www.nyse.com* , and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change 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 is amending Rule 13 to adopt a Do Not Ship, or “DNS,” order. A DNS order will be a limit order to buy or sell that is to be quoted and/or executed in whole or in part only on the Exchange. In the event the order would require routing to another market center pursuant to Exchange rules or federal securities laws, it would be immediately cancelled by Exchange systems. The proposed DNS order provides an alternative for market participants who are seeking to have their order quoted and executed solely on the Exchange. The Exchange states that the DNS order provides the market participant with control over execution costs and where the order will be handled. Regulation National Market System (“Reg. NMS”) requires, among other things, that with limited exceptions, trading centers have policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent the execution of trades at prices inferior to protected quotations displayed by other market centers. 5 The Exchange states that, in this context, orders that are routed away to other market center(s) in compliance with Reg. NMS may cause the market participant to incur multiple fees because the customer has to pay a separate fee each time the order is routed to other market center(s) during the course of its execution. The DNS order enables a market participant to control the costs associated with order execution by limiting the execution of the order in whole or in part, to the Exchange. 5 *See* 17 CFR 242.611. *See also* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005). Similarly, a market participant who desires to have its order executed in whole or in part solely on the Exchange will also benefit from the DNS order which, by its terms, will immediately and automatically cancel if it is required to be routed away to another market center. Generally, a DNS order can quote and trade on the Exchange. Where the bid or offer on the Exchange matches the bid or offer at another market center, an incoming DNS order that is eligible to quote and trade will do so first at the Exchange. However, if quoting the DNS order will cause the locking or crossing of another market center in violation of Exchange Rule 19 (Locking or Crossing Protected Quotations in NMS Stocks), the DNS order will cancel. If all or part of a DNS order would have been required, pursuant to Federal securities laws, to be routed to another market center upon entry at the Exchange, it will immediately and automatically cancel. When a DNS order is not eligible to be traded, it will be placed on the Display Book system at its limit price. The Commission has previously approved the use of order types substantially similar to the DNS on other exchanges. 6 The Exchange believes that the DNS order will not only give the market participant greater flexibility in terms of execution costs and where the order will be handled, but it will also allow the Exchange a greater opportunity to compete in the current market landscape. 6 *See* NYSE Arca, Inc. Equities Rule 7.31 (Orders and Modifiers) subsection

(w)PNP Order (Post No Preference); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44983 (October 25, 2001), 66 FR 55225 (November 1, 2001) (SR-PCX-00-25). *See also* Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. Rules of the Board of Governors Rule 185 (Orders and Order Execution) subsection

(b)(Limited Price Orders) subparagraphs (1)(D); Securities Exchange Release No. 54538 (September 28, 2006), 71 FR 59184 (October 6, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-43). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirement under Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 7 that the rules of an Exchange are 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. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change does not:

(1)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;

(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(3)become operative for 30 days after the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 8 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 9 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). NYSE has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. 10 The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because the Commission has previously approved similar order types for other exchanges, 11 and waiver will allow the Exchange to implement this order type as soon as its systems are modified to recognize it. 12 For this reason, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be effective and operative upon filing with the Commission. 13 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). Rule 19b-4(f)(6) also requires the self-regulatory organization to give the Commission notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement. 11 *See supra* at note 6. 12 The Exchange represents that it seeks the requested waivers to allow for the immediate implementation of this new order type upon the operability of the Exchange's systems on or about May 18, 2007. 13 For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 14 14 The Commission considers the 60-day abrogation period to have commenced on May 11, 2007, the date the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1. 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-2007-24 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-24. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-24 and should be submitted on or before June 11, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-9667 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-55766; File No. SR-NYSE-2006-06] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to Proposed New Rule 350A (“Business Entertainment”) Concerning Policies and Procedures Addressing Business Entertainment May 15, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act” or “Exchange Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on February 15, 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, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by NYSE. On April 26, 2007, NYSE filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. 4 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 Amendment No. 1 replaced and superseded the original rule filing in its entirety. 4 The Commission also is separately publishing a notice by the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) to propose new IM-3060 on business entertainment, which is substantially similar to NYSE's proposed rule text. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55765 (May 15, 2007) (SR-NASD-2006-044). The NYSE proposal and the NASD proposal primarily differ in that the NYSE proposal contains a “Notice to Customers” provision. *See* Section II(A)(1), Purpose section, and Section IV, Solicitation of Comments section, below. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes new Rule 350A (“Business Entertainment”) to address conflict of interest issues in connection with the provision of business entertainment by member organizations to representatives of customers or prospective customers. Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new language is italicized. Business Entertainment Rule 350A *(a) General Requirements* *No member organization or person associated with a member organization shall, directly or indirectly, provide any business entertainment to a customer representative pursuant to the establishment of, or during the course of, a business relationship with any customer that is intended or designed to cause, or would be reasonably judged to have the likely effect of causing, such customer representative to act in a manner that is inconsistent with:* *(1) The best interests of the customer; or* *(2) The best interests of any person to whom the customer owes a fiduciary duty.* *(b) Definitions* *For purposes of this rule, the following definitions shall apply:* *(1) The term “customer” means:* *(A) a person that maintains a business relationship with a member organization via the maintenance of an account, through the conduct of investment banking, or pursuant to other securities-related activity; or* *(B) a person whose customer representative receives business entertainment for the purpose of encouraging such person to establish a business relationship with a member organization by opening an account with the member organization or by conducting investment banking or other securities-related activity with the member organization.* *(2) The term “customer representative” means a person who is an employee, officer, director, or agent of a customer, unless such person is a family member of the customer.* *(3) The term “family member” means a person's parents, mother-in-law or father-in-law, spouse, brother or sister, brother-in-law or sister-in-law, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, and children.* *(4) The term “business entertainment” means any social event, hospitality event, sporting event, entertainment event, meal, leisure activity, or event of like nature or purpose, including business entertainment offered in connection with a charitable event, educational event or business conference, as well as any transportation or lodging related to such activity or event, in which a person associated with a member organization accompanies a customer representative.* *(A) If a customer representative is not accompanied by an appropriate associated person of the member organization, any expenses associated with the business entertainment will be considered a gift under Rule 350 unless exigent circumstances make it impractical for an associated person to attend. All instances where such exigent circumstances are invoked must be clearly and thoroughly documented and be subject to the prior written approval of a designated supervisory person or, in very limited circumstances where such prior approval cannot reasonably be obtained, to a prompt post-event review to be conducted and documented by such supervisory person.* *(B) Anything of value given or otherwise provided to a customer representative that does not fall within the definition of “business entertainment” is a gift under Rule 350.* *(C) In valuing business entertainment expenses pursuant to this Rule, a member organization's written policies and procedures must specify the methodology to be used by the member organization to calculate the value of business entertainment. In general, business entertainment expenses should be valued at the higher of face value or cost to the member organization.* *(D) For purposes of this Rule, the terms “person associated with a member organization” or “associated person” are defined to include:

(1)A natural person who is registered or has applied for registration under the Rules of the NYSE;

(D)are designed to detect and prevent business entertainment that is intended as, or could reasonably be perceived to be intended as, an improper quid pro quo or that could otherwise give rise to a potential conflict of interest or undermine the performance of a customer representative's duty to a customer or to any person to whom the customer owes a fiduciary duty; and * *(E) establish standards to ensure that persons designated to supervise and administer the written policies and procedures are sufficiently qualified; and* *(F) require appropriate training and education for all personnel who supervise, administer, or are subject to the written policies and procedures.* *(2) A member organization's written policies and procedures may distinguish, and set specifically tailored standards for, business entertainment in connection with events that are deemed to be primarily educational, charitable, or philanthropic in nature, provided that such standards comply with the requirements of this rule and are explicitly addressed in the written policies and procedures.* *(d) Recordkeeping* *(1) Each member organization's written policies and procedures must require the maintenance of detailed records of business entertainment expenses provided to any customer representative. The member organization is not required to maintain records of:* *(A) business entertainment when the total value of the business entertainment, including all expenses associated with the business entertainment, does not exceed $50 per day; or* *(B) additional expenses incurred in connection with otherwise recorded business entertainment that do not, in the aggregate, exceed $50 per day.* *(2) Each member organization's written policies and procedures must include provisions reasonably designed to prevent member organization associated persons from circumventing the recordkeeping requirements in contravention of the spirit and purpose of this rule (e.g., a pattern of providing a customer representative with business entertainment valued at $48).* *(3) Each member organization's written policies and procedures must require that, upon a customer's written request, the member organization will promptly make available to the customer any records regarding business entertainment provided to customer representatives of that customer.* *(e) Notice to Customers* *Each member organization must have a system in place to give notice (e.g., via the member organization's Web site, a disclosure document, or other appropriate means) to customers that utilize customer representatives subject to this rule that, upon a customer's written request, the member organization will promptly provide detailed information regarding the manner and expense of any business entertainment provided to their customer representative(s) by such member organization.* *(f) Exemptions* *(1) General Exemptions* *This rule does not apply to any member organization that does not engage in business entertainment. For any member organization that engages in business entertainment, this rule applies only with respect to business entertainment provided to customer representatives.* *(2) Specific Exemption for Member Organizations with Business Entertainment Expenses Below $7,500* *A member organization whose business entertainment expenses in the course of its fiscal year are below $7,500 shall be subject only to paragraphs (a), (b), (c)(1)(D) and

(E)of this rule and shall otherwise be exempt from paragraphs (c),

(d)and (e). Each member organization that relies on this exemption must be able to evidence that its business entertainment expenses are below the $7,500 threshold.* II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, NYSE included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below, and the most significant aspects of such statements are set forth in Sections A, B, and C below. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange is proposing new Rule 350A (“Business Entertainment” or the “Rule”) to address conflict of interest issues in connection with the provision of business entertainment by member organizations to representatives of customers or prospective customers. Specifically, the proposed rule addresses the concern that customer representatives' decisions to direct business ( *e.g.* , order flow) to a given member organization may be influenced by lavish entertainment provided by a member organization or a person associated with a member organization (“associated person”), rather than on the basis of the brokerage services to be provided. Such conduct is potentially violative of both Commission and self-regulatory organization rules ( *e.g.* , best execution obligations). 5 5 Although not explicitly defined by the Commission, when acting as an agent for its customers, a broker-dealer owes such customers a duty of best execution. *See* NYSE Rule 123A.41 which provides that a broker handling a market order is to use due diligence to execute the order at the best price or prices available under the published market procedures of the Exchange. The Exchange has worked closely with industry representatives and the NASD to develop a substantially uniform industry business entertainment standard to address the potential for such conflicts of interest. The Exchange initially contemplated a strictly prescriptive approach that established specific quantitative dollar standards for all broker-dealers. However, for the reasons discussed in detail below, such an approach was ultimately deemed impracticable as it neither reasonably addressed the regulatory issue in question nor the business realities of Exchange membership. In light of the practical difficulties associated with the imposition of a single quantitative standard across the spectrum of broker-dealer business models, the proposed rule takes a more principle-based approach with flexible prescriptive elements and guidelines. Background In attempting to codify business entertainment guidelines, the Exchange was faced with developing an approach that addresses regulatory concerns, is practical, and does not unreasonably nor unduly interfere with broker-dealers' legitimate commercial and business relationships. The primary merit of adopting a strictly prescriptive approach with fixed dollar limits is that it provides bright line standards that, arguably, could facilitate industry compliance. However, imposing a fixed dollar standard is not without practical problems. For example, it does not take into account regional differences—which is to say that what might be considered “lavish” or “excessive” in one city might not necessarily be deemed so in another. Further, what might be considered appropriate entertainment for an investment banking/institutional client base might be considered lavish and/or excessive in a retail customer context. Since terms such as “lavish” or “excessive” can be subjective and standards of appropriateness may vary according to factors noted above, the NYSE concluded that the idea of prescribing industry-wide dollar amount standards was impracticable. A specific dollar threshold could not be established that would justifiably apply to all broker-dealers, taking into account variances in size and business model, and the range of customer types ( *e.g.* , investment banking, institutional, retail, and those with fiduciary obligations such as investment advisers and pension fund representatives). Further, a uniform standard would give rise to unintended effects related to firm participation in, or sponsorship of, charitable events. There is also frequent linkage between education and entertainment that would likely become problematic. In many instances, firms combine legitimate educational functions with lodging, meals and entertainment, making it difficult to separate business expenses from entertainment expenses under a prescriptive regulatory scheme. Thus, the Exchange is proposing a more flexible, principle-based approach that would require each firm to develop, within a prescribed regulatory framework, standards that are effective and appropriate for its business model that would be administered via procedures that are transparent and well documented. Outline of the Proposed Rule General Prohibition Subsection

(a)of proposed Rule 350A imposes the general prohibition that “no member organization or person associated with a member organization shall, directly or indirectly, provide any business entertainment to a customer representative pursuant to the establishment of, or during the course of, a business relationship with any customer that is intended or designed to cause, or would be reasonably judged to have the likely effect of causing, such customer representative to act in a manner that is inconsistent with:

(1)The best interests of the customer or

(2)the best interests of any person to whom the customer owes a fiduciary duty.” The general nature of this prohibition recognizes that no rule of this type can identify and specifically address each and every potential conflict-of-interest scenario that may arise. Note, however, that the prohibition against provision of entertainment “directly or indirectly” is intended to prevent circumvention of the spirit of the rule. For instance, it would be a violation of the Rule if an associated person of a member organization were to either utilize his or her personal funds in an effort to evade the dictates of the Rule, or to encourage an employee of a member organization subsidiary to provide entertainment on behalf of the member organization. Note also that the purpose of the proposed Rule is to address customer representative conflicts of interest that could adversely affect the customer. The Rule would not apply to business entertainment provided by an associated person directly to individual (natural person) customers or potential customers. Definition of Key Terms Proposed Rule 350A(b) defines the terms “customer,” “customer representative” and “business entertainment” as follows: “Customer” The term “customer” means “(1) A person 6 that maintains a business relationship with a member organization via the maintenance of an account, through the conduct of investment banking, or pursuant to other securities-related activity, or

(2)a person whose customer representative receives business entertainment for the purpose of encouraging such person to establish a business relationship with a member organization by opening an account with the member organization or by conducting investment banking or other securities-related activity with the member organization.” 6 NYSE Rule 2 defines the term “person” to mean “a natural person, corporation, partnership, association, joint stock company, trust, fund or any organized group of persons whether incorporated or not. “Customer Representative” The term “customer representative” means “a person who is an employee, officer, director, or agent of a customer, unless such person is a family member 7 of the customer.” The “family member” exemption is proposed to exclude instances where an individual has power of attorney over the account of a close family member's account, such accounts opened under the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act or instances where a person exercises discretion over their spouse's account. The Exchange does not believe such arrangements are likely to result in the types of conflicts the proposed rule is intended to address and their inclusion would thus constitute an undue regulatory burden on membership. 7 The term “family member” is defined as “a person's parents, mother-in-law or father-in-law, spouse, brother or sister, brother-in-law or sister-in-law, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, and children.” “Business Entertainment” 8 The term “business entertainment” means “any social event, hospitality event, sporting event, entertainment event, meal, leisure activity, or event of like nature or purpose, including business entertainment offered in connection with a charitable event, educational event or business conference, as well as any transportation or lodging related to such activity or event, in which an associated person of a member organization accompanies a customer representative” (absent “exigent circumstances,” discussed below). Anything of value given or otherwise provided to a customer representative that does not fall within the definition of “business entertainment” is a gift subject to NYSE Rule 350 (“Compensation or Gratuities to Employees of Others”). 8 *See also* sections titled “Exigent Circumstances” and “Valuation of Business Entertainment” below. “Associated Person” The terms “person associated with a member organization” or “associated person” are defined to include:

(1)A natural person who is registered or has applied for registration under the Rules of the NYSE;

(2)a sole proprietor, partner, officer, director, or branch manager of a member organization, or other natural person occupying a similar status or performing similar functions, or a natural person engaged in the investment banking or securities business who is directly or indirectly controlling or controlled by a member organization, whether or not any such person is registered or exempt from registration with the NYSE or NASD. The Exchange has been asked about the extent to which the proposed rule change reaches business entertainment conducted outside the United States, particularly entertainment provided by persons who are employed in commonly controlled affiliates of a financial services company operating in the United States and/or foreign jurisdictions. As an initial matter, proposed Rule 350A reaches all business entertainment of a member organization and persons associated with a member organization, even if such entertainment occurs outside of the United States or is provided to foreign individuals. However, the Exchange does not believe that all persons who are employed in commonly controlled affiliates of a financial services company operating in the United States and/or foreign jurisdictions are necessarily associated persons of the member organization, even if they report to a person who, in another capacity, is an associated person of a member organization. An associated person of a member organization may have management and supervisory responsibilities for non-member affiliates of a financial services company, located within or outside of the United States, without the result that the persons being managed and supervised in the non-member affiliates would necessarily be deemed associated persons of the member organization. It is the view of the Exchange that in such instances the following factors establish that an employee of a non-member affiliate is not an associated person of the member organization:

(1)The manager/supervisor of that employee is recognized in the member organization as having a scope of responsibilities outside of the member organization;

(2)the exercise of the management and supervision over that employee by such manager/supervisor is not controlled by the member organization, is reviewable for purposes of performance and compensation outside of the member organization, and is not conducted for the benefit of the member organization; and

(3)the employee of the non-member affiliate is not otherwise employed or engaged in the investment banking or securities business of the member organization or controlled by the member organization in respect of such activities. Undefined Terms Any term not specifically defined in Rule 350A shall have the meaning ascribed to it as otherwise defined or understood within the rules of the Exchange and the interpretations thereof. Exigent Circumstances As noted above, the definition of “business entertainment” generally prescribes that if a customer representative is not accompanied by an appropriate associated person of the member organization, any expenses associated with the business entertainment will be considered a gift under NYSE Rule 350. An exception to this requirement is proposed to address instances when exigent circumstances make it impractical for an associated person to attend a business entertainment event. 9 All instances where such exigent circumstances are invoked must be clearly and thoroughly documented and be subject to the prior written approval of a designated supervisory person or, in very limited circumstances where such prior approval cannot reasonably be obtained, to a prompt post-event review to be conducted and documented by such supervisory person. 9 *See* Rule 350A(b)(4)(A). The Exchange believes that the “exigent circumstances” exception provides necessary flexibility in light of real-world, last minute emergency situations that could arise that would make it difficult, if not impossible, for an appropriate member organization associated person to attend a business entertainment event with a customer representative. Examples of exigent circumstances would be a sick child, an accident, or some other sudden overriding circumstance. The Exchange does not believe this provision would lead to circumvention of the spirit or substance of the proposed rule since all such occurrences are subject to detailed documentation such that any patterns of abuse would become quickly apparent to supervisory personnel. Written Policies and Supervisory Procedures Required Pursuant to the general directive of proposed Rule 350A(a), Rule 350A(c) would require that each member organization have written policies and supervisory procedures applicable to business entertainment that incorporate prescribed elements. The following prescribed elements, outlined under subsection (c)(1), are applicable to all member organizations except those with business expenses below $7,500, which are subject only to subsection (c)(1)(D) and (c)(1)(E): 10 10 *See* proposed Rule 350A(f) and section below entitled “Specific Exemptions for Member Organizations with Business Entertainment Expenses Below $7,500.”

(A)The policies and procedures must define forms of business entertainment that are “appropriate” and “inappropriate,” using quantitative and/or qualitative standards that address the nature and frequency of the entertainment provided, as well as the type and class of any accommodations or transportation provided in connection with such business entertainment. This provision recognizes that, in order to establish meaningful standards that are enforceable, firms must have objective bases upon which to determine the appropriateness of business entertainment. It also recognizes that, given the wide range of broker-dealer business models, it is impractical to require a single, industry-wide set of standards. Further, by placing the responsibility on firm personnel to develop firm-specific standards has the benefit of fostering internal discussion and serious consideration of issues related to the provision of business entertainment in both an ethical and practical context.

(B)The policies and procedures must make clear that anything of value given or otherwise provided to a customer representative that does not fall within the definition of “business entertainment” is a gift under NYSE Rule 350.

(C)The policies and procedures must impose either specific dollar limits on business entertainment or require prior written supervisory approval when such entertainment expenses will exceed certain specified dollar thresholds. This provision would require firms to make objective, “hard number” value determinations regarding generally acceptable levels of business entertainment. Not only would this approach have the benefit of establishing unambiguous standards, it would also encourage the self-comparison of such standards among firms of similar size and circumstance. This, in conjunction with feedback from regulatory organizations, would likely result in the establishment of “unofficial,” but generally accepted industry standards over time.

(D)The policies and procedures must be designed to detect and prevent business entertainment that is intended as, or could reasonably be perceived to be intended as, an improper quid pro quo or that could otherwise give rise to a potential conflict of interest, or undermine the performance of a customer representative's duty to a customer or to any person to whom the customer owes a fiduciary duty. In addition to highlighting the core purpose of the Rule, this provision is intended to make clear that member organizations are expected to take a proactive approach with respect to potential violations of their business entertainment policy.

(E)The policies and procedures must establish standards to ensure that persons designated to supervise and administer the written policies and procedures are sufficiently qualified. Since the Rule does not prescribe exam qualifications or other standardized qualification requirements for supervisors or administrators of business entertainment policies and procedures, member organizations must formalize a process to ensure that informed determinations are made with regard to the ability of persons assigned such responsibilities. 11 11 *See* NYSE Rule 345A(b). Note also that although Rule 350A, as proposed in Amendment No. 1, does not include a specific requirement that members test business entertainment policies and procedures, such policies and procedures are subject to NYSE Rule 342.23 which requires the development and maintenance of adequate controls over each business activity and the establishment of procedures for independent verification and testing of those business activities. Telephone call between Rebekah Liu, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation (“Division”), Commission, and Steve Kasprzak, Principal Counsel, NYSE, May 15, 2007.

(F)The policies and procedures must provide appropriate education and training to all personnel who supervise, administer, or are subject to the written policies and procedures prescribed by the proposed Rule. This provision is intended to ensure that all relevant personnel are familiar with, and have a clear understanding of, the firm's business entertainment policies and procedures. Such education and training could be provided as part of the “Firm Element” requirement of NYSE Rule 345A (“Continuing Education for Registered Persons”). 12 12 *See* NYSE Rule 345A(b). Certain “Business Entertainment” Standards May Be Distinguished In addition to the above requirements, the proposed Rule 13 would make clear that the written policies and supervisory procedures may distinguish, and set specifically tailored standards for, business entertainment deemed to be primarily educational in nature or closely associated with a charitable event or philanthropic cause. This provision recognizes that certain types of events that could be characterized as business entertainment, or that include entertainment as an element, might serve a larger purpose than those strictly or primarily intended to solicit business. Any such standards to be utilized must be explicitly addressed in the member's organization policies and procedures, and must still comply with all requirements of the proposed Rule. 13 *See* Rule 350A(c)(2). Recordkeeping Requirements In order to ensure that expenses can be tracked and analyzed for potential improprieties, proposed Rule 350A(d) makes clear that each member organization's written policies and procedures must require maintenance of detailed records of business entertainment expense provided to any customer representative. Further, such policies and procedures must require that, upon a customer's written request, each member organization will promptly make available to a customer any records regarding business entertainment provided to customer representatives of that customer. However, in order not to impose an undue regulatory burden, the proposed Rule includes an exemption to the recordkeeping requirement for de minimis or incidental expenses that would not reasonably be expected to influence the behavior of a customer representative. Specifically, records would not be required to be maintained for:

(1)Business entertainment when its total value, including all associated expenses, does not exceed $50 per day (such as a $45 dinner, or an inexpensive dinner and movie which, in the aggregate, cost less than $50); or

(2)Additional expenses incurred in connection with otherwise recorded business entertainment that do not, in the aggregate, exceed $50 per day (such as a hot dog and soda purchased at a professional sporting event where the cost of the ticket—presuming it is greater than $50—has been duly recorded as a business entertainment expense). 14 14 Member organizations should be aware, however, that they may need to track such expenses under other NYSE or Commission rules. Each member organization's written policies and procedures must include provisions reasonably designed to prevent member organization associated persons from circumventing the recordkeeping requirements in contravention of the spirit and purpose of this rule ( *e.g.* , a pattern of providing a customer representative with business entertainment valued at $48, or the disaggregation of events—such as a $40 dinner followed by a $40 sporting event—required by the Rule to be aggregated and recorded). As discussed more fully below, the recordkeeping requirements of proposed Rule 350A(d) shall not apply to member organizations with annual business entertainment expenses below $7,500. Valuation of Business Entertainment The definition of the term “business entertainment” states that each member organization's written policies and procedures must specify the methodology to be used by the member organization to calculate the value of business entertainment. 15 In general, business entertainment expenses should be valued at the higher of face value or cost to the member organization. Thus, if a theatre ticket with a face value of $100 is obtained at a cost to the member organization of $300, the ticket would be valued at the higher purchase price. 15 *See* Rule 350A(a)(4)(C). Provision of Business Entertainment Records to Customers/Notice Requirement Proposed Rule 350A(e) requires that each member organization's written policies and procedures provide that, upon a customer's written request, the member organization will promptly make available to the customer any business entertainment records regarding business entertainment provided any customer representative of that customer. Further, each member organization must have a system in place to give notice ( *e.g.* , via the member organization's Web site, a disclosure document, or other appropriate means) to customers that utilize customer representatives subject to this rule that, upon a customer's written request, the member organization will promptly provide such information. The Exchange notes that the “notice” provision will encourage the expansion of monitoring and controls on business entertainment beyond broker-dealers to the employers of business entertainment recipients. Application of Proposed Rule 350A General Application Subsection (f)(1) makes clear that the proposed Rule does not apply to any member organization that does not engage in business entertainment. Thus, for example, if a member organization provides no business entertainment as defined by the proposed Rule, it would not be required to establish otherwise applicable policies and procedures. This subsection further clarifies that the proposed rule applies only with respect to business entertainment provided to customer representatives. Thus, as noted above, it would not be applicable to situations where a member organization directly provides business entertainment to natural person customers or potential natural person customers. 16 16 Telephone call between Steve Kuan, Special Counsel, Division, Commission, and Steve Kasprzak, Principal Counsel, NYSE, May 7, 2007. Specific Exemptions for Member Organizations With Business Entertainment Expenses Below $7,500 The concerns that the proposed rule seek to address are not presented by those member organizations that, in the aggregate, do not devote significant resources to business entertainment. Consequently, the proposed rule provides for a partial exemption, under subsection (f)(2), for those member organizations with annual business entertainment expenses below $7,500. The provision prescribes that the $7,500 ceiling be measured on a fiscal year basis. Each member organization that relies on the exemption must evidence that its business entertainment expenses are below the threshold. Specifically, member organizations below the $7,500 threshold would be exempt from the written “Policies and Procedures” provisions of proposed Rule 350A(c)(1) except for subsections

(D)and (E). Subsection

(D)requires written policies and procedures to detect and prevent business entertainment that is intended as, or could reasonably be perceived to be intended as, an improper quid pro quo or that could otherwise give rise to a potential conflict of interest, or undermine the performance of a customer representative's duty to a customer or to any person to whom the customer owes a fiduciary duty. Subsection

(E)requires the establishment of standards to ensure that persons designated to supervise and administer the written policies and procedures are sufficiently qualified. Member organizations below the $7,500 threshold would also be exempt from the prescribed recordkeeping provisions of proposed Rule 350A(d). As noted above, however, member organizations must be able to evidence that its business entertainment expenses were below the threshold over the course of their fiscal year. In addition, member organizations below the $7,500 threshold would be exempt from the requirement, under Rule 350A(e) to have a system in place to give notice ( *e.g.* , via a website, disclosure document, or other appropriate means) to customers that utilize customer representatives that, upon a customer's written request, the member organization will promptly provide detailed information regarding the manner and expense of any business entertainment provided to their customer representatives by such member organization. Note that member organizations that avail themselves of the specified exemptions under proposed subsection (f)(2) would still be fully subject to proposed Rule 350A(a) which imposes the general prohibition that “no member organization or person associated with a member organization shall, directly or indirectly, provide any business entertainment to a customer representative pursuant to the establishment of, or during the course of, a business relationship with any customer that is intended or designed to cause, or would be reasonably judged to have the likely effect of causing, such customer representative to act in a manner that is inconsistent with:

(1)The best interests of the customer or

(2)the best interests of any person to whom the customer owes a fiduciary duty.” Interpretive Guidance/Practical Criteria As discussed above, required written policies and procedures addressing business entertainment must include criteria that the member organization will utilize to evaluate the propriety of business entertainment in various contexts. Although not included in the Rule text itself, the Exchange intends to include in an Information Memo released in conjunction with the approval of proposed Rule 350A the following factors to be considered when establishing such criteria: With Respect to the Entertainment

(a)Whether the nature, cost, or extent of the entertainment could reasonably give rise to an actual or perceived conflict of interest, or encourage a quid pro quo business transaction;

(b)Whether the nature, cost, and extent of the entertainment is consistent with the nature of the business relationship and the relationship of the parties involved;

(c)Whether the provision of any transportation, lodging, or other accommodations is appropriate;

(d)Whether the entertainment would be considered usual and customary within the industry;

(e)Whether the cost of the entertainment is consistent with the location (city and/or establishment) in which the entertainment takes place;

(f)Whether the entertainment extends to the client's spouse or to guests of the client;

(g)Whether the entertainment might otherwise reasonably be perceived to be improper. With Respect to the Client

(a)Whether the recipient of the entertainment has fiduciary duties ( *e.g.* , to a public company, a state, or a municipality) that may give rise to specific legal or ethical considerations;

(b)The frequency of entertainment provided to the client;

(c)The frequency of firm contact with the client in the ordinary course of business. With Respect to the Business Purpose

(a)Whether the entertainment is in recognition of a completed deal;

(b)Whether the entertainment is educational/philanthropic in nature, or strictly recreational. In closing, the Exchange believes that the proposed Rule is an effective and practical approach to address the conflict-of-interest issues related to business entertainment, therefore approval of the proposal is requested. The Exchange further requests an effective date of 6 months from approval in order to give membership sufficient time to sufficiently upgrade systems and develop procedures to effectively comply with the Rule's requirements. The Exchange will announce the effective date in an Information Memo. 2. Statutory Basis The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6 of the Act, 17 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5), 18 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and national market system, and in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes the proposed amendments are consistent with this section in that they permit firms to develop and maintain business relationships while requiring controls that mitigate potential conflicts of interest that can arise in such relationships. 17 15 U.S.C. 78f. 18 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change 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 The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period

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

(ii)as to which NYSE 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. The Commission notes that the NYSE's proposed Rule 350A(e) provides that the NYSE member organization must have a system in place to give notice ( *e.g.* , via the member organization's Web site, a disclosure document, or other appropriate means) to customers that use customer representatives that upon a customer's written request, the NYSE member will provide detailed information regarding the manner and expense of any business entertainment provided by the NYSE member to the customer representative, 19 while the NASD's proposal does not contain a similar notice provision. 20 The Commission is soliciting comment on this difference between the NYSE and NASD proposed rules and specifically whether NASD should have a similar notification provision for customers utilizing customer representatives. 19 As noted above, according to the Exchange the notice provision will encourage the expansion of monitoring and controls on business entertainment beyond broker-dealers to the employers of business entertainment recipients. 20 *See infra* footnote 3. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2006-06 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-2006-06. 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 ( *www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2006-06 and should be submitted on or before June 11, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 21 21 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-9668 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Request and Comment Request The Social Security Administration

(SSA)publishes a list of information collection packages that will require clearance by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)in compliance with Pub. L. 104-13, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, effective October 1, 1995. The information collection packages that may be included in this notice are for new information collections, approval of existing information collections, revisions to OMB-approved information collections, and extensions (no change) of OMB-approved information collections. SSA is soliciting comments on the accuracy of the agency's burden estimate; the need for the information; its practical utility; ways to enhance its quality, utility, and clarity; and on ways to minimize burden on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Written comments and recommendations regarding the information collection(s) should be submitted to the OMB Desk Officer and the SSA Reports Clearance Officer. The information can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to the individuals at the addresses and fax numbers listed below: (OMB), Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for SSA. Fax: 202-395-6974. E-mail address: *OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov* . (SSA), Social Security Administration, DCFAM, Attn: Reports Clearance Officer, 1333 Annex Building, 6401 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21235. Fax: 410-965-6400. E-mail address: *OPLM.RCO@ssa.gov.* I. The information collections listed below are pending at SSA and will be submitted to OMB within 60 days from the date of this notice. Therefore, your comments should be submitted to SSA within 60 days from the date of this publication. You can obtain copies of the collection instruments by calling the SSA Reports Clearance Officer at 410-965-0454 or by writing to the address listed above. 1. eData Registration/Account Modification—20 CFR 401.45—0960-NEW Collection Background Section 5 U.S.C. 552a, (e)(10) of the Privacy Act of 1974 requires agencies to establish appropriate administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to ensure the security and confidentiality of records. Also, Section (f)(2) &

(3)requires agencies to establish requirements for identifying an individual who requests a record or information pertaining to that individual and to establish procedures for disclosure of personal information. SSA promulgated Privacy Act rules in the Code of Federal Regulations, Subpart B. Procedures for verifying identity are at 20 CFR 401.45. Collection Description The eData Services Web site allows various external organizations to submit files to a variety of SSA systems and in some cases receive return files. The users include State/local government agencies, other Federal agencies, and some nongovernmental business entities. The SSA systems that process data transferred via eData include, but are not limited to, systems responsible for disability processing and benefit determination or termination. The information collected on form SSA-118 (Government to Government Services Online Web site Registration Form) to register organizations is used exclusively to maintain the identity of the requester within eData. The requestor is already a known entity to a sponsor within SSA. The SSA sponsor completes the registration forms and the information is submitted to SSA's User Interface Team (UIT). Once this is completed, SSA provides the requestor with their new password, and conducts a walkthrough of the eData website as necessary. The organization also can make modifications to their online account ( *e.g.* , address change) by completing an online form, SSA-119 (Government to Government Service Online Web site Account Modification/Deletion Form). *Type of Request:* Collection in use without OMB Control Number. Collection instrument Number of annual respondents Frequency of response Average burden per response (minutes) Estimated annual burden hours SSA-118 925 1 15 231 SSA-119 1,575 1 15 394 Totals 2,500 625 2. Certificate of Election for Reduced Widow(er)'s Benefits—20 CFR, Subpart D, 404.335—0960-NEW Section 202(q) of the Social Security Act provides for the authority to reduce benefits under certain conditions when elected by a beneficiary. However, reduced benefits are not payable to an already entitled spouse (or divorced spouse) who: • Is at least age 62 and under full retirement age in the month of the number holder's death; and • Is receiving both reduced spouse's (or divorced spouse's) benefits and either retirement or disability benefits in the month before the month of the number holder's death. In order to elect reduced widow(er) benefits, a beneficiary must complete form SSA-4111. SSA uses the information collected on Form SSA-4111 to determine eligibility for and pay a qualified dually entitled widow(er) (or surviving divorced spouse) reduced benefits. The respondents are qualified dually entitled widow(er)s (or surviving divorced spouse) who elect to receive a reduced widow(er) benefit. *Type of Request:* Collection in use without OMB Control Number. *Number of Respondents:* 30,000. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden Per Response:* 2 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 1,000 hours. 3. Proof of Age Study—20 CFR 404.715—0960-NEW Background Through the information obtained from this study, the Agency hopes to obtain data that will allow benefit award processes to be streamlined in anticipation of the significant workload increases as the “baby boomers” (those persons born between 1946 and 1964) attain retirement age. The information collected will be used to determine the extent to which a claimant's allegation of date of birth agrees with the date of birth in SSA's records and to estimate the program costs associated with using alleged dates of birth as proof of age

(POA)to adjudicate claims without obtaining birth certificates or other evidence of age or citizenship. Collection of Information SSA will mail up to 3,000 appointment letters to a random sample of number holders

(NH)with the expectation of being able to arrange 2,000 one-time telephone interviews. (Some letters will be returned for no address or there will be no response from the NHs.) Appointment letters will be sent to the NHs to explain the purpose of the study; request a phone number; and establish a convenient time to conduct the phone interview. The phone interviewers will obtain an alleged date of birth, place of birth, and parent's names. If the NH's alleged date of birth agrees with the Numident date of birth, SSA will obtain POA (birth certificates if available) from the custodians to determine the impact of using the alleged date as POA. If the alleged date of birth is materially different than the date of birth on the Numident, POA evidence will not be obtained from the custodian. If a birth certificate is obtained a proof code will be annotated to the Numident to prevent unnecessary development if subsequently a claim is filed on the account. If the POA development establishes a different date of birth than the Numident/alleged date of birth, SSA will estimate the potential error dollars involved. Study data will be compiled and findings reported to SSA's Executive Staff. *Type of Request:* New information collection. *Number of Respondents:* 2,000. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 1,334 hours. Form name Number of respondents Frequency of response Average burden per response (minutes) Estimated annual burden (hours) Appointment Letter and Response 2,000 1 15 500 SSA-8510 (Authorization to the SSA to Obtain Personal Information) 2,000 1 5 167 Phone Questionnaire 2,000 1 20 667 Collection of POA Evidence from Record Custodian 1 52 2 15 490 Total 6052 1,824 1 1960 total responses 2 Varies. II. The information collections listed below have been submitted to OMB for clearance. Your comments on the information collections would be most useful if received by OMB and SSA within 30 days from the date of this publication. You can obtain a copy of the OMB clearance packages by calling the SSA Reports Clearance Officer at 410-965-0454 or by writing to the address listed above. 1. SSI Monthly Wage Reporting System—20 CFR 416.701-732—0960-0715 Collection Background SSI recipients are required to report changes in their income, resources and living arrangements that may affect eligibility or payment amount. Currently, SSI recipients report changes on Form SSA-8150, Reporting Events—SSI, or to an SSA teleservice representative through SSA's toll-free telephone number, or they visit their local Social Security office. Wages have, historically, been the source of SSI's highest error rate largely due to non-reporting by beneficiaries, deemors, and representative payees. Failure to report changes in wages timely accounts for approximately $400 million in overpayments each year. Consequently, SSA is evaluating methods for increasing reporting. SSA has tested and determined that given an easily accessible automated format, individuals will increase compliance with reporting responsibilities. Increased timely reporting has resulted in a decrease in improper payments. One of the methods tested, described below, is the SSI Wage Reporting System. Collection Description Participants who need to report a change in monthly wages (Comment: There are other forms of earned income that the phone line does not support) will call SSA's toll-free telephone number to report the change. The participants will access SSA's system using knowledge-based authentication (providing name, SSN and date of birth). Participants will speak their report (voice recognition technology) and/or key in the information using the telephone key pad. This automated system will then directly update our records and issue receipts in compliance with Section 202 of the Social Security Protection Act of 2004. We are requesting permanent authorization of the existing wage reporting system to continue providing an alternative, and more efficient, means by which beneficiaries, their representative payees, and deemors can report wages via a toll-free telephone number. We believe this permanent authorization is necessary to effectively implement national usage of the system and substantially increase the number of reports received via this collection method. Without permanent authorization, we are concerned that an interruption in reporting would prove detrimental to our earlier efforts to recruit and train reporters, would damage the current regularity of reporting, and would considerably mitigate SSA's potential to reduce improper payments resulting from erroneous, or deficient, wage reports. Respondents to this collection are SSI recipients, deemors and representative payees of recipients who agree to participate in the program. *Type of Request:* Revision of OMB approval. *Number of Respondents:* 50,000. *Frequency of Response:* 12. *Average Burden Per Response:* 4 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 40,000 hours. 2. Cost Reimbursable Research Request—0960-NEW Background The Social Security Administration

(SSA)is responsible for administering two cash benefit programs, notably the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) and SSI programs. To carry out this task, SSA maintains a number of files with detailed information on individuals and their characteristics, such as demographics, employment, earnings, assets, disability diagnosis, location, and other information. While designed for SSA to carry out its administrative tasks, the data files offer great informational depth to researchers interested in SSA's programs and other research areas. As a result, SSA provides qualified researchers needing agency administrative data for a variety of projects. SSA's data files are governed by strict confidentiality restrictions and are not publicly accessible. Therefore, SSA has charged the Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics

(ORES)as the primary interface for researchers, either within SSA or outside of it, who seek access to SSA's program files. To safeguard the information and the public trust, ORES has established comprehensive unified application process procedures for obtaining program data for research use. The Cost Reimbursable Research Request To request SSA program data for research, the researcher must submit a completed research application for SSA's evaluation. In the application, the requesting researcher must provide required basic project information and describe the way in which the proposed project will further SSA's mission to promote the economic security of the nation's people through its administration of the OASDI programs, and/or the SSI program. Depending on the type of research data needed, the requesting researchers may be required to provide SSA with up to 14 prescribed project information elements to properly assess their data request. Once the application is reviewed and approved by ORES, a Reimbursable Conditions of Use Agreement is signed with the requestor which outlines the conditions and safeguards agreed to for the research project data exchange. The requestor may use the data for research and statistical purposes only. This is a reimbursable service and SSA recovers all expenses incurred in providing this information. The respondents to this information collection are the qualified researchers that request SSA administrative data for a variety of projects. These applicants include but are not limited to Federal and State government agencies and/or their contractors, private entities, and colleges/universities. *Type of Request:* Collection in use without OMB Control Number. *Number of Respondents:* 15. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden per Response:* 240 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 60 hours. The total average annual cost for all respondents to use this service is approximately $112,500 or an average of $7,500 to complete a single request. This cost projection is an estimate of SSA's administrative and systems costs to analyze and provide the requested research data. Since this is a reimbursable service, all associated costs are borne by the requesters. 3. Authorization To Release Medical Report to Physician—20 CFR 401.55 & 401.100—0960-NEW If the claimant, his or her court appointed representative, or a parent of a minor child wants the consultative examination

(CE)report sent to the claimant's treating physician, he or she will complete the information requested on Form SSA-91 and send it to SSA for processing. SSA will use the information collected to send the CE report to the authorized physician. Respondents are applicants for disability claims. *Type of Request:* Collection in Use Without an OMB Number. *Number of Respondents:* 7,922. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden Per Response:* 5 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 660 hours. 4. Claimant Travel Reimbursement Request—20 CFR 404.999a-d—0960-NEW The claimants have the right to be reimbursed for their travel expenses to and from a consultative examination (CE). In order to be reimbursed, the claimants must submit an itemized list of what they spent to travel round trip to the CE. The SSA-104 is sent to the claimants with the CE appointment notice. If the claimants want to be reimbursed for their travel expenses, they must complete, sign and return the SSA-104 to SSA. SSA uses the information collected on this form to determine the amount of reimbursement. Respondents are applicants for disability claims. *Type of Request:* Collection in Use without an OMB Number. *Number of Respondents:* 11,092. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden Per Response:* 10 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 1,849 hours. Dated: May 15, 2007. Elizabeth A. Davidson, Reports Clearance Officer, Social Security Administration. [FR Doc. E7-9712 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4191-02-P SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Request and Comment Request The Social Security Administration

(SSA)publishes a list of information collection packages that will require clearance by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)in compliance with Pub. L. 104-13, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, effective October 1, 1995. The information collection packages that included in this notice are for new information collections and revisions to existing OMB-approved information collections. SSA is soliciting comments on the accuracy of the agency's burden estimate; the need for the information; its practical utility; ways to enhance its quality, utility, and clarity; and on ways to minimize burden on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Written comments and recommendations regarding the information collection(s) should be submitted to the OMB Desk Officer and the SSA Reports Clearance Officer. The information can be mailed, faxed or emailed to the individuals at the addresses and fax numbers listed below: (OMB), Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for SSA. Fax: 202-395-6974. E-mail address: *OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov* . (SSA), Social Security Administration, DCFAM, Attn: Reports Clearance Officer, 1333 Annex Building, 6401 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21235. Fax: 410-965-6400. E-mail address: *OPLM.RCO@ssa.gov.* I. The information collection listed below is pending at SSA and will be submitted to OMB within 60 days from the date of this notice. Therefore, your comments should be submitted to SSA within 60 days from the date of this publication. You can obtain copies of the collection instrument by calling the SSA Reports Clearance Officer at 410-965-0454 or by writing to the address listed above. *Medicare Quality Review Forms—20 CFR 418(b)(5)—0960-0707.* The Social Security Administration

(SSA)uses the Medicare Quality Review Forms collection to verify the information reported on Medicare Part D Subsidy applications (OMB No. 0960-0696) for a selected number of applicants. SSA is planning to expand the scope of this collection by conducting Quality Reviews with some current recipients of Medicare Part D subsidies who have recently undergone the redetermination process (OMB No. 0960-0723). This ICR is for two new appointment letters (forms SSA-9313 and SSA-9314) that such beneficiaries will complete to schedule an appointment for their Quality Review. The respondents are current recipients of Medicare Part D subsidies who have recently undergone a redetermination and who were selected for a Quality Review. *Type of Request:* Revision to an existing OMB-approved information collection. Form number and name Number of respondents Frequency of response Average burden per response (minutes) Estimated annual burden (hours) SSA-9301 (Medicare Subsidy Quality Review Case Analysis Questionnaire) 10,000 1 35 5,833 SSA-9302 (Notice of Quality Review Acknowledgement Form for those with Phones) 10,000 1 15 2,500 SSA-9303 (Notice of Quality Review Acknowledgement Form for those without Phones) 1,000 1 15 250 SSA-9304 (Checklist of Required Information; burden accounted for with forms SSA-9302, SSA-9303) SSA-9308 (Request for Information) 20,000 1 15 5,000 SSA-9310 (Request for Documents) 10,000 1 5 833 SSA-9309 (Life Insurance Verification Form) 8,000 1 15 2,000 SSA-8510 (Authorization to the Social Security Administration to Obtain Personal Information) 10,000 1 5 833 SSA-9313 (Notice of Appointment Quality Review Acknowledgement Form)* 4,500 1 15 1,125 SSA-9314 (Notice of Quality Review Acknowledgement Form (unknown phone numbers)* 500 1 15 125 Total 18,499 * These are the two new forms being cleared in the current ICR for this collection. II. The information collection listed below has been submitted to OMB for clearance. Your comments on the information collection would be most useful if received by OMB and SSA within 30 days from the date of this publication. You can obtain a copy of the OMB clearance package by calling the SSA Reports Clearance Officer at 410-965-0454, or by writing to the address listed above. *Electronic Records Express—0960—NEW.* Electronic Records Express

(ERE)is a new Internet-based platform which facilitates the electronic submission of medical and school records needed for the disability process. These records are currently mailed as hard paper copies to SSA and state Disability Determination Services

(DDSs)under the aegis of OMB No. 0960-0555, the Clearance of Information Collections Conducted by State Disability Determination Services on Behalf of SSA. While SSA and the DDSs will continue to accept paper copies, ERE offers respondents the opportunity to submit these records electronically. The revised burden for the actual document submission will continue to be covered under 0960-0555; this new collection covers the ERE registration and user training process. The respondents are medical providers and school professionals who submit information to SSA on behalf of disability applicants or beneficiaries. *Type of Request:* New information collection. *Number of Respondents:* 20,000. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden Per Response:* 5 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 1,667 hours. Dated: May 15, 2007. Elizabeth A. Davidson, Reports Clearance Officer, Social Security Administration. [FR Doc. E7-9726 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4191-02-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice: 5799] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: DS-156, Nonimmigrant Visa Application, OMB Control Number 1405-0018 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:* Nonimmigrant Visa Application. • *OMB Control Number:* 1405-0018. • *Type of Request:* Extension of a Currently Approved Collection. • *Originating Office:* Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA/VO). • *Form Number:* DS-156. • *Respondents:* Nonimmigrant visa applicants. • *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 12,000,000. • *Estimated Number of Responses:* 12,000,000. • *Average Hours Per Response:* 1 hour. • *Total Estimated Burden:* 12,000,000 hours per year. • *Frequency:* Once per respondent. • *Obligation to Respond:* Required to Obtain or Retain a Benefit. DATES: The Department will accept comments from the public up to 60 days from May 21, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods: • E-mail: *VisaRegs@state.gov* (Subject line must read DS-156 Reauthorization). • Mail (paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions): Chief, Legislation and Regulation Division, Visa Services—DS-156 Reauthorization, 2401 E Street, NW., Washington DC 20520-30106. 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 Lauren Prosnik of the Office of Visa Services, U.S. Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., L-603, Washington, DC 20522, who may be reached at

(202)663-2951 or *prosnikla@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:* Form DS-156 is completed by aliens seeking nonimmigrant visas to the U.S. The Department will use the DS-156 to elicit information necessary to determine an applicant's visa eligibility. *Methodology:* The DS-156 is completed by applicants online or, in exceptional circumstances, applicants may submit a paper application to posts abroad. The applicant prints the application and a 2-D barcode. When the applicant appears at the interview the barcode is scanned and the information electronically received. Dated: April 23, 2007. Stephen A. Edson, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Consular Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-9746 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-06-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5800] Determination and Certification Under Section 40A of the Arms Export Control Act Pursuant to section 40A of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2781), and Executive Order 11958, as amended, I hereby determine and certify to the Congress that the following countries are not cooperating fully with United States antiterrorism efforts: Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela. This determination and certification shall be transmitted to the Congress and published in the **Federal Register** . Dated: May 14, 2007. John D. Negroponte, Deputy Secretary of State, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-9727 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-10-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Delegation of Authority 301] Delegation by the Secretary of State to Henrietta Fore Authorities Normally Vested in the Director of Foreign Assistance By virtue of the authority vested in me as Secretary of State by the laws of the United States, including the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2151 *et seq.* ), Executive Order 12163 of September 29, 1979, as amended (44 FR 56673), the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962 (22 U.S.C. 2601) the United Nations Participation Act of 1945, as amended (22 U.S.C. 287 *et seq.* ) Executive Order 10206 of January 19, 1951, the President's Memorandum Delegation of Authority dated February 16, 1995, the Arms Export Act as amended (22 U.S.C. 2751 *et seq.* ), Executive Order 11958 of January 18, 1977, and Section 1 of the State Departments Basic Authorities Act. As amended (22 U.S.C. 2651a), I herby delegate to Henrietta H. Fore, to the extent authorized by law, as functions that have been or may be delegated to the Director of Foreign Assistance. Any authority of function covered by this delegation of authority may also be exercised by the Secretary or the Deputy Secretary. Any act, executive order, regulation, or procedure subject to or affected by, this delegation of authority shall be deemed to be such act, executive order, regulation, or procedure as amended from time to time. This delegation of authority shall expire upon the designation of an individual to serve as the Director of Foreign Assistance. This delegation of authority shall be published in the **Federal Register** . Dated: May 10, 2007. Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-9725 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-10-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Delegation of Authority 302] Delegation by the Secretary of State to Maura Harty of Authorities Normally Vested in the Under Secretary for Management By virtue of the authority vested in me as Secretary of State by the laws of the United States, including, Section 1 of the State Departments Basic Authorities Act. As amended (22 U.S.C. 2651a), I hereby delegate to Maura A. Harty, to the extent authorized by law, all authorities that have been or may be delegated to the Under Secretary for Management. Any authority covered by this delegation may also be exercised by the Secretary, the Deputy Secretary, or the Under Secretary for Management. Any act, executive order, regulation, or procedure subject to or affected by, this delegation of authority shall be deemed to be such act, executive order, regulation, or procedure as amended from time to time. This delegation shall expire upon the appointment and entry upon duty of an individual to replace Henrietta H. Fore as the Under Secretary of State for Management. This delegation of authority shall be published in the **Federal Register** . Dated: May 10, 2007. Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-9761 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-10-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5798] United States Climate Change Science Program The United States Climate Change Science Program requests expert review of the fourth and final volume of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

(IPCC)Fourth Assessment Report (“Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report”). The IPCC was established by the United Nations Environment Programme

(UNEP)and the World Meteorological Organization

(WMO)in 1988. In accordance with its mandate and as reaffirmed in various decisions by the Panel, the major activity of the IPCC is to prepare comprehensive and up-to-date assessments of policy-relevant scientific, technical, and socio-economic information for understanding the scientific basis of climate change, potential impacts, and options for mitigation and adaptation. The First Assessment Report was completed in 1990, the Second Assessment Report in 1995, and the Third Assessment Report in 2001. Three working group volumes and a synthesis report comprise the Fourth Assessment Report. Working Group I assesses the scientific aspects of the climate system and climate change; Working Group II assesses the vulnerability of socio-economic and natural systems to climate change, potential negative and positive consequences, and options for adapting to it; and Working Group III assesses options for limiting greenhouse gas emissions and otherwise mitigating climate change. So far in 2007, all three working groups have had their contributions to the Fourth Assessment Report accepted by the Panel. These assessments were based upon the peer-reviewed literature and have been characterized by an extensive and open review process involving both scientific/technical experts and governments before being accepted by the IPCC. The IPCC Secretariat has informed the U.S. Department of State that the second-order draft of the Synthesis Report of the Fourth Assessment Report is available for Expert and Government Review. This volume is composed of a Summary for Policymakers and an underlying report, integrating materials—in a non-technical fashion—contained within the three working group contributions to the Fourth Assessment Report. The Climate Change Science Program Office (CCSPO) is coordinating collection of U.S. expert comments and the review of this collations by panels of Federal scientists and program managers to develop a consolidated U.S. Government submission. Instructions on how to format comments are available at *http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/ipcc/syr4ar-review.htm* , as is the document itself and other supporting materials. Comments must be sent to CCSPO by 27 June 2007 to be considered for inclusion in the U.S. Government collation. Comments submitted for consideration as part of the U.S. Government Review should be reserved for that purpose, and not also sent to the IPCC Secretariat as a discrete set of expert comments. Properly formatted comments should be sent to CCSPO at *SYR-4AR-USGreview@climatescience.gov* by COB Wednesday, 27 June 2007. Include report acronym and reviewer surname in e-mail subject title to facilitate processing. For further information, please contact David Dokken, U.S. Climate Change Science Program, Suite 250, 1717 Pennsylvania Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20006 ( *http://www.climatescience.gov* ). Dated: May 14, 2007. Drew Nelson, Acting Office Director, Office of Global Change, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-9752 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-09-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization; Solicitation of Applications for Regional Small Business Transportation Resource Centers (SBTRCs) Fiscal Year

(FY)2007, Grant Opportunity AGENCY: Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU), DOT. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: OSDBU announces that it has published an opportunity to apply for the FY 2007 Small Business Transportation Business Resource Center funding on the grants.gov Web site ( *http://www.grants.gov* ). Section 4134 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: OSDBU is responsible for the implementation and execution of the Department of Transportation

(DOT)activities on behalf of small businesses in accordance with Section 8, 15 and 31 of the Small Business Act (SBA), as amended. The OSDBU also administers the provisions of Title 49, the Minority Resource Center

(MRC)which includes the duties of advocacy, outreach and financial services on behalf of small and disadvantaged business and those certified under CFR 49 parts 23 and or 26 as Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE). This request solicits competitive proposals from business centered community-based organizations, transportation-related trade associations, colleges and universities, community colleges or chambers of commerce for participation in OSDBU's Small Business Transportation Resource Centers (SBTRC) under the Minority Resource Center

(MRC)program. OSDBU will enter into Cooperative Agreements with these organizations to outreach to the small business community in their designated region and provide financial and technical assistance, business training programs such as, business assessment, management training, counseling, technical assistance, marketing and outreach, and the dissemination of information, to encourage and assist small businesses to become better prepared to compete for, obtain, and manage DOT funded transportation-related contracts and subcontracts at the Federal, State and local levels. Eligible applicants must be registered with the Internal Revenue Service as 501 C(6) or 501 C(3) tax-exempt organizations. To apply for funding, applicants must be registered with grants.gov. Registration with grants.gov may take two to five days before the system will allow you to apply for grants using the grants.gov Web site *http://www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp* ). Submit application in accordance with the instructions provided. Applications for grant funding must be submitted electronically to OSDBU through the grants.gov Web site. DATES: Proposals must be submitted to Grants.gov by June 15, 2007, 4 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. Proposals received after the deadline will be considered non-responsive and will not be reviewed. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Art Jackson, U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization, 400 7th Street, SW., Room 9414, Washington, DC 20590, Tel. 202-366-1930 or 800-532-1169. Office hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., EST., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Issued on: May 15, 2007. Denise Rodriguez-Lopez, Director, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU). [FR Doc. E7-9692 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Ninth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 206/EUROCAE WG 76 Plenary AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 206 meeting. SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 206: Aeronautical Information Services Data Link. DATES: The meeting will be held June 11-15, 2007 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Grand Hotel Tyska torget 2, Box 1152, 600 41 Norrkoping, Sweden. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

(1)RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036-5133; telephone

(202)833-9339; fax

(202)833-9434; Web site *http://www.rtca.org* ;

(2)Hosted by LFV Group—Swedish Airports and Air Navigation Services; Onsite Contact: telephone +46-11-36401; Web site: *http://www.grandhotel.elite.se* , e-mail: *info.grandhotel@elite.se* ;

(3)Contact Person: Roger Li, Vikoplan 11, S-601 79 Norrkoping, Sweden, telephone +46-11-192713; Mobile +46-709-189148; Fax: +46-11-192246. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is hereby given for a Special Committee 206 meeting/EUROCE WG 76. The agenda will include: • *June 11:* • Opening Season (Chairman's Remarks and Introductions, Review and Approve Meeting. Agenda and Minutes, Discussion, Action Item Review). • Report on the May Task Force committee to harmonize the Met and AIS OSEDs. • Due to the need to focus on finishing the document, there will be no general presentation at Norrkoping. If a presentation will enhance the ability to complete the document, it will be accepted. • Breakout of Subgroup 1. • Breakout of Subgroup 2. • *June 12:* • Subgroup 1 and Subgroup 2 Meetings. • *June 13:* • Subgroup 1 and Subgroup 2 Meetings. • *June 14:* • Subgroup 1 and Subgroup 2 Meetings. • *June 15:* • Plenary Session. • Closing Session (Other Business, Date and Place of Next Meeting, Closing Remarks, Adjourn). Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may present a written statement to the committee at any time. Issued in Washington, DC, on May 10, 2007. Francisco Estrada C., RTCA Advisory Committee. [FR Doc. 07-2498 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 28

Traces to 28 documents

CFR