Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 17 / Thursday, January 26, 2006 / Notices 4391 

9 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

1 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52760 

(November 10, 2005), 70 FR 69617. 

4See comments from James J. Angel (‘‘Angel’’), 

Associate Professor of Finance, McDonough School 

of Business, Georgetown University, dated 

December 5, 2005 (‘‘Angel Letter’’); Steve Berman 

(‘‘Berman’’), SRIC-Atlantic Trust, dated December 6, 

2005 (‘‘Berman Letter’’); Edward S. Knight, 

Executive Vice President and General Counsel, The 

Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (‘‘Nasdaq’’), dated 

December 7, 2005 (‘‘Nasdaq Letter’’); and Mark 

Patterson (‘‘Patterson’’), Managing Director, NWQ 

Investment Management, LLC, dated December 7, 

2005 (‘‘Patterson Letter’’). 

5See letter from Mary Yaeger, Assistant Secretary, 

NYSE, to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Commission, 

dated December 14, 2005 (‘‘NYSE Response 

Letter’’). 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

Within 35 days of the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register or within such longer period (i) 

as the Commission may designate up to 

90 days of such date if it finds such 

longer period to be appropriate and 

publishes its reasons for so finding or 

(ii) as to which the Exchange consents, 

the Commission will: 

(A) By order approve such proposed 

rule change, as amended, or 

(B) institute proceedings to determine 

whether the proposed rule change, as 

amended, 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, as amended, is consistent with 

the Act. Comments may be submitted by 

any of the following methods: 

Electronic Comments 

• Use the Commission’s Internet 

comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File 

Number SR–Amex–2005–075 on the 

subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20549–9303. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–Amex–2005–075. This file 

number should be included on the 

subject line if e-mail is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for inspection and copying in 

the Commission’s Public Reference 

Section, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such 

filing also will be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of the Amex. All comments 

received will be posted without change; 

the Commission does not edit personal 

identifying information from 

submissions. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. All submissions 

should refer to File Number SR–Amex–

2005–075 and should be submitted on 

or before February 16, 2006. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated 

authority.9

J. Lynn Taylor, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E6–968 Filed 1–25–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–53092A; File No. SR–

CBOE–2005–105] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

Chicago Board Options Exchange, 

Incorporated; Notice of Filing of 

Proposed Rule Change Relating to the 

CBOE’s Membership Rules for Foreign 

Member Organizations 

January 19, 2006. 

Correction 

FR Doc. E6–465, issued on January 18, 

2006 on page 2963, regarding Securities 

Exchange Act Release No. 53092, 

incorrectly cited the date of the notice 

as January 10, 2005. The date should 

read January 10, 2006. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated 

authority.1

J. Lynn Taylor, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E6–966 Filed 1–25–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–53152; File No. SR–NYSE–

2005–75] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New 

York Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order 

Granting Approval to a Proposed Rule 

Change Relating to Section 802.01E of 

the Listed Company Manual 

Concerning Continued Listing of 

Companies That Fail to File Their 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

Annual Reports in a Timely Manner 

January 19, 2006. 

I. Introduction 

On October 26, 2005, the New York 

Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘NYSE’’ or 

‘‘Exchange’’) submitted to the Securities 

and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’), 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 relating to amendments to the 

Listed Company Manual procedures 

applicable to companies that fail to file 

in a timely manner their annual report 

required by the Act. The proposed rule 

change was published for public 

comment in the Federal Register on 

November 16, 2005.3 The Commission 

received four comments regarding the 

proposed rule change.4 On December 

14, 2005, the Exchange submitted a 

response to the comments.5 This order 

approves the proposed rule change. 

II. Description of the Proposed Rule 

Change 

The Exchange recently amended 

Section 802.01E of the NYSE’s Listed 

Company Manual, which codifies the 

Exchange’s procedures relating to 

situations where companies fail to 

satisfy the Commission’s filing 

requirements for annual reports on 

Forms 10–K, 10–KSB, 20–F, 40–F, or NCSR in a timely manner. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
4392 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 17 / Thursday, January 26, 2006 / Notices 

6 In determining whether an additional threemonth trading period is appropriate, the Exchange 

considers the likelihood that the filing can be made 

during the additional three month period, as well 

as the company’s general financial status based on 

information provided by a variety of sources, 

including the company, its audit committee, its 

outside auditors, the staff of the Commission, and 

any other regulatory body. 

7The NYSE represented that it maintains an upto-date list of companies that are late in filing their 

annual reports with the SEC on its Web site at 

www.nyse.com. Additionally, the NYSE represented 

that each listed company has a unique data page on 

the site and, when applicable, this page indicates 

that the company is considered a late filer. 

8See supra note 4. 

9See Angel Letter; Berman Letter; and Patterson 

Letter. 

10See Nasdaq Letter. 

11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

12Nasdaq stated that, rather than shortening the 

total timeframe within which a company must file 

annual reports before being delisted, a goal 

articulated by the Commission in the order 

approving Section 802.01E, the NYSE’s proposal 

would extend that timeframe. 

Section 802.01E currently provides 

that if a company fails to timely file an 

annual report with the SEC, the 

Exchange will monitor the company and 

the status of the filing. If the company 

fails to file the annual report within 

nine months from the filing due date, 

the Exchange may, in its sole discretion, 

allow the company’s securities to be 

traded for up to an additional threemonth trading period depending on the 

company’s specific circumstances.6 If 

the company does not file its annual 

report by the end of the nine-month or 

12-month period, as applicable, the 

Exchange will begin suspension and 

delisting procedures in accordance with 

the procedures in Section 804.00. 

The Exchange believes that there are 

very rare circumstances involving listed 

companies that have a position in the 

market (relating to both the nature of 

their business and their very large 

publicly-held market capitalization) 

such that their delisting from the 

Exchange would be significantly 

contrary to the national interest and the 

interests of public investors, 

notwithstanding a delay in an annual 

report filing that extended beyond one 

year. 

The Exchange has proposed to amend 

Section 802.01E to provide that, in these 

very rare circumstances, a listed 

company may remain suitable for listing 

given: (1) Its continuing compliance 

with the NYSE’s quantitative and 

qualitative listing standards; (2) its 

continued ability to meet certain debt 

obligations and adequately finance 

operations; (3) its progress, as reported 

to the Exchange, in completing its 

financial statements; (4) its public 

transparency on its status, issuing press 

releases regarding its progress in 

completing its financial statements and 

providing other information regarding 

its financial status; and (5) the 

reasonable expectation that the 

company will be able to resume timely 

filings in the future. In these 

circumstances, the Exchange may 

forebear from commencing suspension 

and delisting proceedings 

notwithstanding the listed company’s 

failure to file the annual report within 

the time periods specified in Section 

802.01E. Under the proposal, the 

Exchange must advise the SEC of, and 

publish on the NYSE’s Web site, any 

such determination. In addition, the 

Exchange will reevaluate such 

determination once every three months 

and, if the Exchange reaffirms its 

decision to allow trading to continue, 

the Exchange must advise the SEC of, 

and publish on the NYSE’s Web site, 

that reaffirmation. 

In all such cases, the NYSE has 

represented that Exchange staff will 

continue to hold regular discussions 

and meetings with the company’s 

management, directors, regulators, and 

advisors to monitor the status of the 

annual report filing, as well as the 

company’s compliance with the NYSE’s 

other qualitative and quantitative 

requirements, and to determine whether 

to allow the company to continue to 

trade despite the continued failure to 

file an annual report with the SEC. In 

addition, in order to provide investors 

with appropriate notice that companies 

have failed to file their annual reports 

with the SEC in a timely manner, the 

Exchange will continue to monitor and 

disseminate information on the failure 

of such companies to file their annual 

report with the SEC, including through 

appending an ‘‘.LF’’ indicator in the 

financial status field of the company’s 

ticker symbol and distributing that 

information via the low speed ticker and 

through the data stream to market data 

vendors.7

With respect to all companies subject 

to Section 802.01E, the Exchange is also 

proposing to (1) shorten the initial 

monitoring period for companies that 

miss their filing due date from nine 

months to six months and (2) lengthen 

from three months to six months the 

additional period that the Exchange may 

grant companies prior to the 

commencement of suspension and 

delisting procedures. In addition, the 

Exchange is proposing minor 

amendments to Section 802.01E to 

clarify the type of information that must 

be included in the press release to be 

issued when the company is late in 

filing its annual report. Specifically, in 

addition to the status of the filing, the 

press release must note the delay and 

the reasons for it, as well as the 

anticipated filing date, if known. The 

proposal also makes some nonsubstantive clarifying changes to the 

rule language. 

III. Comments 

The Commission received four 

comments on the proposal.8 Three 

commenters supported the proposal; 9

one commenter opposed the proposal.10

Angel stated that the proposal seemed 

reasonable and should be approved. In 

his letter, however, he states that the 

markets should adopt a uniform method 

of alerting investors of issuers that are 

late in filing their annual reports, and 

expresses concern that common 

financial portals do not carry late filer 

identifiers appended by the markets. 

Patterson stated that he believed the 

proposal ‘‘sets forth reasonable and 

workable guidelines regarding the 

evaluation and execution of the 

delisting process.’’ Berman stated that 

‘‘[c]ompanies with strong financials, but 

for certain circumstances are involved 

in a lengthy historical restatement and 

re-audit process to comply with GAAP 

can be unfairly penalized by this 

existing rule as presently stated.’’ The 

Berman Letter supports allowing some 

discretion under certain circumstances 

in the current delisting standard for late 

filers, noting that a hard and fast rule 

has the potential to cause short-term 

volatility that may be especially harmful 

to individual investors. 

Nasdaq believes that the Commission 

should reject the proposed rule change, 

arguing that it is ‘‘antithetical’’ to 

Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,11 which 

requires that the rules of the NYSE be 

designed to protect investors and the 

public interest and not be designed to 

permit unfair discrimination between 

issuers. According to Nasdaq, the NYSE 

proposal would allow certain issuers to 

trade indefinitely without publicly 

available audited financial statements 

and without the required disclosures.12

Nasdaq believes that ‘‘the availability 

and integrity of financial statements is 

an issue that cuts across all markets and 

raises fundamental issues of investor 

protection.’’ Furthermore, the proposed 

rule change would be available only to 

a company having a position in the 

market such that its delisiting would be 

significantly contrary to the national 

interest and the interests of public 

investors, due to the nature of its 

business and its ‘‘very large’’ publiclyheld market capitalization. According to 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 17 / Thursday, January 26, 2006 / Notices 4393 

13See NYSE Response Letter. 

14 In approving the proposed rule change, the 

Commission has considered its impact on 

efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 

15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 

15As discussed above, the NYSE will continue to 

identify late filers by means of an ‘‘LF’’ appendage 

to the company’s ticker symbol. The Commission 

continues to urge the NYSE to encourage data 

vendors and subscribers to display the indicator. 

16As noted above, the NYSE states, among other 

things, that it will continue to hold regular 

discussions and meetings with the company’s 

management, directors, regulators and advisors to 

monitor the status of the annual report filing and 

compliance with other listing standards, and to 

determine if continued trading should be permitted 

despite the failure of the company to file its annual 

report with the Commission. The Commission notes 

that despite the formal reaffirmation required under 

the rule every three months and the public 

announcement of such decision, the Commission 

expects the monitoring of such companies to take 

place on an on-going basis throughout the extended 

continued trading period. 

Nasdaq, not only are these criteria 

subjective, the NYSE does not 

specifically explain how these criteria 

‘‘justify allowing an issuer to continue 

to trade when that issuer has been 

unable to provide required audited 

financial statements and disclosures to 

investors for a period longer than one 

year.’’ Nasdaq further states that 

allowing such a company to continue to 

trade for an extended period of time 

ignores the emphasis the Commission 

has placed on prospective investors, 

who have a right to assume that 

companies meet listing requirements. 

The NYSE responded to Nasdaq’s 

concerns by stating that it ‘‘does not 

agree that the proposed rule change is 

contrary to the interests of investors, as 

there will be significant protections for 

investors built into its application.’’ 13

The NYSE pointed out specifically that 

the provision will apply only ‘‘in 

circumstances where Exchange staff 

have determined that a company 

remains suitable for listing given its 

relative financial health and compliance 

with the NYSE’s quantitative and 

qualitative listing standards and that 

there is a reasonable expectation that 

the company will be able to resume 

timely filings in the future.’’ According 

to the NYSE, the proposal protects 

investors ‘‘by requiring the Exchange to 

take into consideration the relative 

transparency of the company’s public 

disclosures relating to the status of its 

completion of its filing and its provision 

of other information regarding its 

financial status.’’ The NYSE also noted 

its obligation to reconsider extensions 

every three months, to monitor the 

company’s progress in compliance 

efforts, and to identify late filers by 

means of an ‘‘LF’’ appendage to the 

company’s ticker symbol and Web site 

disclosure. 

The NYSE does not agree that the 

proposed rule is ‘‘antithetical’’ to 

Section 6(b)(5) of the Act for unfairly 

discriminating among issuers. The 

NYSE stated that the motivation for the 

rule is that ‘‘the effective functioning of 

certain companies is of particular 

importance to the national interest and 

that a disruption in the orderly market 

for their securities would have serious 

implications not just for those 

companies and their shareholders but 

also for the country as a whole.’’ The 

NYSE asserts that the ‘‘effect on the 

national interest’’ and not merely the 

size of an issuer will be considered in 

determining whether to grant an 

exception. 

IV. 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. In particular, the Commission 

finds that the proposed rule change is 

consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the 

Act, which requires an Exchange to 

have rules that 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; and are not designed to 

permit unfair discrimination between 

customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.14

Although the Commission believes 

that the goal of ensuring that listed 

companies have filed accurate, up-todate annual reports under the Act is of 

critical importance, the Commission 

recognizes that there may be certain 

very rare circumstances under which 

the new NYSE delisting requirements 

could be too inflexible. In this regard, 

the Commission believes that the 

proposed rule change provides the 

Exchange with appropriately limited 

flexibility to allow a company that is 

more than 12 months late in filing its 

annual report with the Commission to 

remain listed on the NYSE. This limited 

discretion is available only in certain 

very rare circumstances where the 

company has a position in the market 

such that its delisiting would be 

significantly contrary to the national 

interest and the interests of public 

investors, due to the nature of its 

business and its very large publicly-held 

market capitalization. 

The Commission notes that the 

proposal has provisions that help to 

assure the availability to investors of 

information on which to base trading 

decisions, even in the absence of formal 

SEC filings. For instance, before the 

NYSE could grant an extension beyond 

12 months, the proposal would require 

it to consider whether the company has 

been publicly transparent on its status, 

issuing press releases regarding its 

progress in completing its financial 

statements and providing other 

information regarding its financial 

status. In addition, the NYSE also must 

consider the issuer’s continuing 

compliance with applicable quantitative 

and qualitative listing standards, its 

continued ability to meet current debt 

obligations and adequately finance 

operations, its progress in completing its 

financial statements, and whether there 

is a reasonable expectation the issuer 

will be able to resume timely filings in 

the future. 

The Commission emphasizes that the 

new standards apply only in certain 

very rare circumstances where the 

Exchange determines that delisting of 

the late filer would be contrary to the 

national interest and the interests of 

public investors, due to the late filer’s 

position in the market (i.e., the nature of 

its business and its very large publiclyheld market capitalization). As the 

NYSE noted in the NYSE Response 

Letter, the standard is meant to apply 

only to those companies where a 

‘‘disruption in the orderly market for 

their securities would have serious 

implications not just for those 

companies and their shareholders but 

also for the country as a whole.’’ While 

the Commission clearly believes that 

information in the annual report 

required under the Act is critical to 

investors and our national markets, we 

believe that, under these circumstances, 

and subject to the conditions in the 

proposed rule change, some limited 

flexibility to allow a company to remain 

listed is appropriate. 

The Commission also notes the 

Exchange must advise the Commission 

of, and publish on the NYSE’s Web site, 

any determination to allow a company 

that is more than 12 months late in 

filing its annual report with the 

Commission to remain listed on the 

NYSE.15 In addition, the Exchange will 

reevaluate such determination once 

every three months and, if the Exchange 

reaffirms its decision to allow trading to 

continue, the Exchange will advise the 

SEC of, and publish on the NYSE’s Web 

site, that reaffirmation.16 The NYSE 

rules also make clear that, regardless of 

the procedures for continued listing of 

a late annual report filer under Section 

802.01E of the Listed Company Manual, 

if at any time the Exchange believes it 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
4394 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 17 / Thursday, January 26, 2006 / Notices 

17 In considering shortening the time periods, the 

NYSE may want to assess whether the shortened 

initial six month period for delisting has had any 

noticeable impact on when later filers actually 

submit up-to-date annual reports. 

18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 19 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

is necessary in the public interest or for 

the protection of investors, it can 

suspend trading immediately in any 

security and commence delisting under 

Section 804.00 of the NYSE’s Listed 

Company Manual. Indeed, the 

Commission expects the NYSE to 

suspend trading quickly and commence 

delisting proceedings immediately 

against any late filer continuing to trade 

under these new provisions should it be 

necessary to do so based on the facts of 

the particular situation. The 

Commission intends to monitor the 

NYSE’s use of the proposed exception to 

its delisting requirement to ensure that 

such use is in compliance with the 

procedures and safeguards set forth in 

this filing. 

Finally, the Commission notes that 

Section 802.01E of the Exchange’s 

Listed Company Manual currently 

requires the delisting of the securities of 

any company that is nine months late in 

filing its annual report on Form 10–K, 

unless the Exchange determines that an 

additional three months is appropriate. 

The Commission believes that changing 

the initial time frame that a late filer has 

to be delisted under the rule from nine 

months to six months is an 

improvement. However, because in 

conjunction with this change, the NYSE 

is proposing to lengthen the additional 

period the Exchange can allow a late 

filer to continue to trade from three 

months to six months, the total 

specified time periods under the rule for 

late filers remains 12 months. While the 

change will have companies reevaluated 

more quickly for delisting with no 

assurance the additional six months will 

be granted, the Commission continues 

to believe that the NYSE should 

consider shortening the total timeframes 

specified under Rule 802.01E for 

delisting a late filer, as well as 

extending such requirements to issuers 

that are late in filing their quarterly 

reports with the Commission.17

V. Conclusion 

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,18 that the 

proposed rule change (SR–NYSE–2005–

75) is approved. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated 

authority.19

J. Lynn Taylor, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 06–769 Filed 1–25–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice 5283] 

Culturally Significant Objects Imported 

for Exhibition Determinations: 

‘‘Amorous Intrigues and Painterly 

Refinement: The Art of Frans van 

Mieris’’

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the 

following determinations: Pursuant to 

the authority vested in me by the Act of 

October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 

2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 

27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and 

Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 

2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et 

seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of 

October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority 

No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as 

amended, and Delegation of Authority 

No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], 

I hereby determine that the objects to be 

included in the exhibition ‘‘Amorous 

Intrigues and Painterly Refinement: The 

Art of Frans van Mieris,’’ imported from 

abroad for temporary exhibition within 

the United States, are of cultural 

significance. The objects are imported 

pursuant to loan agreements with the 

foreign owners. I also determine that the 

exhibition or display of the exhibit 

objects at The National Gallery of Art, 

from on or about February 26, 2006, 

until on or about May 21, 2006, and at 

possible additional venues yet to be 

determined, is in the national interest. 

Public Notice of these Determinations is 

ordered to be published in the Federal 

Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information, including a list of 

the exhibit objects, contact Carol B. 

Epstein, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the 

Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State 

(telephone: 202/453–8048). The address 

is U.S. Department of State, SA–44, 301 

4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, 

DC 20547–0001. 

Dated: January 18, 2006. 

C. Miller Crouch, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department 

of State. 

[FR Doc. E6–976 Filed 1–25–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice 5282] 

Department of State Performance 

Review Board Members (for Non 

Career Senior Executive Employees) 

In accordance with section 4314 (c) 

(4) of the Civil Service Reform Act of 

1978 (Pub. L. 95–454), the Executive 

Resources Board of the Department of 

State has appointed the following 

individuals to the Department of State 

Performance Review Board (for Non 

Career Senior Executive Employees). 

Kara G. Licalsi, Under Secretary for 

Management, White House Liaison, 

Department of State; 

Mary Kathleen Lang, Under Secretary 

for Management, White House 

Liaison, Department of State; 

Brian F. Gunderson, Chief of Staff, 

Office of the Secretary, Department of 

State. 

Dated: January 17, 2006. 

W. Robert Pearson, 

Director General of the Foreign Service and 

Director of Human Resources, Department 

of State. 

[FR Doc. E6–991 Filed 1–25–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

[Policy Statement Number PS–ACE100–

2005–50001] 

Applying Advisory Circular 20–152, 

‘‘RTCA, Inc., Document RTCA/DO–254, 

Design Assurance Guidance for 

Airborne Electronic Hardware,’’ to Title 

14 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 

23 Aircraft 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of availability; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces a 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

proposed policy. This memorandum 

sets up Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) certification policy on applying 

Advisory Circular (AC) 20–152 to 

complex airborne electronic hardware 

(CEH) installed in part 23 aircraft or in 

airships. The specific issues addressed 

concern selecting and applying 

hardware design assurance levels 

(HDAL) to CEH. This notice advises the 

public, especially manufacturers of 

normal, utility, and acrobatic category 

airplanes, and commuter category 

airplanes and their suppliers, that the 

FAA intends to adopt this policy. This 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES