Notices. Notice and request for comments

26,009 words·~118 min read·/register/2007/06/11/07-2891

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

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency

(FEMA)has submitted the following information collection to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and clearance in accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The submission describes the nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents, the estimated burden ( *i.e.* , the time, effort and resources used by respondents to respond) and cost, and includes the actual data collection instruments FEMA will use. *Title:* State Administrative Plan for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. *OMB Number:* 1660-0026. *Abstract:* State grant recipients of Hazard Mitigation Grant Program

(HMGP)funds are required under section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Public Law 93-288, as amended) to develop or review/update a State Administration Plan after each disaster declaration that describes how the State will manage such funds. FEMA is responsible for reviewing and approving the plan for compliance with the requirements of 44 CFR 206.437. *Affected Public:* State, local, or tribal government. *Number of Respondents:* 32. *Estimated Time per Respondent:* 8 hours. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 384. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion. *Comments:* Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management Budget, Attention: Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/FEMA, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to

(202)395-6974. Comments must be submitted on or before July 11, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection should be made to Chief, Records Management, FEMA, 500 C Street, SW., Room 609, Washington, DC 20472, facsimile number

(202)646-3347, or e-mail address *FEMA-Information-Collections@dhs.gov* . Dated: June 4, 2007. John A. Sharetts-Sullivan, Chief, Records Management and Privacy, Information Resources Management Branch, Information Technology Services Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. E7-11174 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-11-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA-1699-DR] Kansas; Amendment No. 6 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Kansas (FEMA-1699-DR), dated May 6, 2007, and related determinations. EFFECTIVE DATE: June 1, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472,

(202)646-2705. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Kansas is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of May 6, 2007: Riley County for Individual Assistance. Chase, Cherokee, Doniphan, Douglas, Harper, Kingman, Nemaha, Riley, and Washington Counties for Public Assistance. Clay, Leavenworth, Lyon, Osborne, Reno, Rice, Saline, and Shawnee Counties for Public Assistance (already designated for Individual Assistance.) (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers

(CFDA)are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program-Other Needs, 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.) R. David Paulison, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency. [FR Doc. E7-11175 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-10-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA-1698-DR] Vermont; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Vermont (FEMA-1698-DR), dated May 4, 2007 and related determinations. EFFECTIVE DATE: June 4, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472,

(202)646-2705. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Vermont is hereby amended to include the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of May 4, 2007: Lamoille County for Public Assistance. (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers

(CFDA)are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program-Other Needs, 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.) R. David Paulison, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency. [FR Doc. E7-11176 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-10-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency Information Collection Activities: U.S./Israel Free Trade Agreement AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: Proposed collection; comments requested. SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)of the Department of Homeland Security submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: U.S./Israel Free Trade Agreement. This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours. This document is published to obtain comments form the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** (72 FR 15891) on April 3, 2007, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 11, 2007. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border Protection, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to

(202)395-6974. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)encourages the general public and affected Federal agencies to submit written comments and suggestions on proposed and/or continuing information collection requests pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L.104-13). Your comments should address one of the following four points:

(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency/component, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies/components estimate of the burden of The proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Title:* U.S./Israel Free Trade Agreement. *OMB Number:* 1651-0065. *Form Number:* N/A. *Abstract:* This collection is used to ensure conformance with the provisions of the U.S./Israel Free Trade Agreement for duty free entry status. *Current Actions:* There are no changes to the information collection. This submission is being submitted to extend the expiration date. *Type of Review:* Extension (without change). *Affected Public:* Businesses, Individuals, Institutions. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 34,500. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 13 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 7,505. *Estimated Total Annualized Cost on the Public:* $143,345. *If additional information is required contact:* Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Room 3.2.C, Washington, DC 20229, at 202-344-1429. Dated: June 3, 2007. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, Information Services Branch. [FR Doc. E7-11213 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Application—Alternative Inspection Services/FAST Commercial Driver Application AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: Proposed collection; comments requested. SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)of the Department of Homeland Security has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995: Application—Alternative Inspection Services/FAST Commercial Driver Application. This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** (72 FR 12181) on March 15, 2007, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 11, 2007. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border Protection, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to

(202)395-6974. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies/components estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Title:* Application—Alternative Inspection Services/FAST Commercial Driver Application. *OMB Number:* 1651-0121. *Form Number:* CBP Forms I-823 and 823F. *Abstract:* The purpose of the Alternative Inspection Services and FAST Programs are to prescreen applicants and their vehicles in order to expedite travelers seeking admission to the United States. CBP plans to institute a web-based system for applicants to apply for Alternative Inspection Services and the FAST Program, and to phase out the paper versions of the I-823 and the 823F. *Current Actions:* This submission is to extend the expiration date. *Type of Review:* Extension (without change to the burden hours). *Affected Public:* Businesses, Individuals. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 275,000. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 1 hour and 6 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 304,000. *Estimated Total Annualized Cost on the Public:* $7,740,000. *If additional information is required contact:* Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Room 3.2.C, Washington, DC 20229, at 202-344-1429. Dated: June 4, 2007. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, Information Services Branch. [FR Doc. E7-11214 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Proposed Collection; Comment Request Regulations Relating to Recordation and Enforcement of Trademarks and Copyrights AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: Proposed collection; comments requested. SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)of the Department of Homeland Security has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995: Regulations Relating to Recordation and Enforcement of Trademarks and Copyrights (Part 133 of the CBP Regulations). This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** (72 FR 12180) on March 15, 2007, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 11, 2007. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border Protection, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to

(202)395-6974. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)encourages the general public and affected Federal agencies to submit written comments and suggestions on proposed and/or continuing information collection requests pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13). Your comments should address one of the following four points:

(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the Proper performance of the functions of the agency/component, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies/components estimate of the burden of The proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Title:* Regulations Relating to Recordation and Enforcement of Trademarks and Copyrights (Part 133 of the CBP Regulations). *OMB Number:* 1651-0123. *Form Number:* None. *Abstract:* Trademark and trade name owners and those claiming copyright protection must provide information sufficient to enable CBP officers to identify violative articles at the borders. *Current Actions:* This submission is to extend the expiration date. *Type of Review:* Extension (without change to the burden hours). *Affected Public:* Businesses, Individuals. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 2,000. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 2 hours. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 4,000. *Estimated Total Annualized Cost on the Public:* $380,000. *If additional information is required contact:* Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Room 3.2.C, Washington, DC 20229, at 202-344-1429. Dated: June 3, 2007. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, Information Services Branch. [FR Doc. E7-11216 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency Information Collection Activities: Importation of Ethyl Alcohol for Non-Beverage Purposes AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: Proposed collection; comments requested. SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)of the Department of Homeland Security has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Importation of Ethyl Alcohol for Non-Beverage Purposes. This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** (72 FR 15892) on April 3, 2007, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 11, 2007. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border Protection, and sent via electronic mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or faxed to

(202)395-6974. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)encourages the general public and affected Federal agencies to submit written comments and suggestions on proposed and/or continuing information collection requests pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13). Your comments should address one of the following four points:

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies/components estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Title:* Importation of Ethyl Alcohol for Non-Beverage Purpose. *OMB Number:* 1651-0056. *Form Number:* N/A. *Abstract:* This collection is a declaration claiming duty-free entry. It is filed by the broker or their agent, and then is transferred with other documentation to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau of the Treasury Department. *Current Actions:* There are no changes to the information collection. This submission is being submitted to extend the expiration date. *Type of Review:* Extension (without change). *Affected Public:* Businesses, Individuals, Institutions. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 300. *Estimated Time Per Respondent:* 5 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 25. *Estimated Total Annualized Cost on the Public:* $544.50. *If additional information is required contact:* Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Room 3.2.C, Washington, DC 20229, at 202-344-1429. Dated: June 4, 2007. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, Information Services Branch. [FR Doc. E7-11218 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Automated Commercial Environment (ACE); National Customs, Automation Program Test of Automated Truck Manifest for Truck Carrier Accounts; Deployment Schedule AGENCY: Customs and Border Protection; Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: General notice. SUMMARY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), in conjunction with the Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, is currently conducting a National Customs Automation Program

(NCAP)test concerning the transmission of automated truck manifest data. This document announces the next group, or cluster, of ports to be deployed for this test. DATES: All land border ports in the state of Minnesota are expected to be fully deployed for testing by June 8, 2007. Comments concerning this notice and all aspects of the announced test may be submitted at any time during the test period to the contact listed below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. James Swanson via e-mail at *james.d.swanson@dhs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The National Customs Automation Program

(NCAP)test concerning the transmission of automated truck manifest data for truck carrier accounts was announced in a notice published in the **Federal Register** (69 FR 55167) on September 13, 2004. That notice stated that the test of the Automated Truck Manifest would be conducted in a phased approach, with primary deployment scheduled for no earlier than November 29, 2004. A series of **Federal Register** notices have announced the implementation of the test, beginning with a notice published on May 31, 2005 (70 FR 30964). As described in that document, the deployment sites for the test have been phased in as clusters. The ports identified belonging to the first cluster were announced in the May 31, 2005 notice. Additional clusters were announced in subsequent notices published in the **Federal Register** including: 70 FR 43892, published on July 29, 2005; 70 FR 60096, published on October 14, 2005; 71 FR 3875, published on January 24, 2006; 71 FR 23941, published on April 25, 2006; 71 FR 42103, published on July 25, 2006; 71 FR 77404, published on December 26, 2006; 72 FR 5070, published on February 2, 2007; 72 FR 7058, published on February 14, 2007; and 72 FR 14127, published on March 26, 2007. New Cluster Through this notice, CBP announces that the next cluster of ports to be brought up for purposes of deployment of the test, to be fully deployed by June 8, 2007, will be all the land border ports in the state of Minnesota. Specifically, these ports are the following: Grand Portage, Lancaster, Pinecreek, International Falls, Roseau, Baudette, and Warroad. This deployment is for purposes of the test of the transmission of automated truck manifest data only; the Automated Commercial Environment

(ACE)Truck Manifest System is not yet the mandated transmission system for these ports. The ACE Truck Manifest System will become the mandatory transmission system in these ports only after publication in the **Federal Register** of 90 days notice, as explained by CBP in the **Federal Register** notice published on October 27, 2006 (71 FR 62922). Previous NCAP Notices Not Concerning Deployment Schedules On Monday, March 21, 2005, a notice was published in the **Federal Register** (70 FR 13514) announcing a modification to the NCAP test to clarify that all relevant data elements are required to be submitted in the automated truck manifest submission. That notice did not announce any change to the deployment schedule and is not affected by publication of this notice. All requirements and aspects of the test, as set forth in the September 13, 2004 notice, as modified by the March 21, 2005 notice, continue to be applicable. Dated: June 1, 2007. Jayson P. Ahern, Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field Operations. [FR Doc. E7-11167 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [F-72911; AK-964-1410-KC-P] Alaska Native Claims Selection AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of decision approving lands for conveyance. SUMMARY: As required by 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that an appealable decision approving the surface and subsurface estates in certain lands for conveyance pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, will be issued to Bering Straits Native Corporation. The lands are in the vicinity of Nome, Alaska, named Glacial Lake, and are located in: Kateel River Meridian, Alaska T. 7 S., R. 35 W., Secs. 11, 14, 24, and 26; Secs. 34, 35, and 36. Containing 3,529.44 acres. T. 8 S., R. 35 W., Secs. 1, 2, and 3. Containing approximately 1,720.00 acres. Aggregating approximately 5,249.44 acres. Notice of the decision will also be published four times in the Nome Nugget. DATES: The time limits for filing an appeal are: 1. Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely affected by the decision shall have until July 11, 2007 to file an appeal. 2. Parties receiving service of the decision by certified mail shall have 30 days from the date of receipt to file an appeal. Parties who do not file an appeal in accordance with the requirements of 43 CFR Part 4, Subpart E, shall be deemed to have waived their rights. ADDRESSES: A copy of the decision may be obtained from: Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State Office, 222 West Seventh Avenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7504. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Bureau of Land Management by phone at 907-271-5960, or by e-mail at *ak.blm.conveyance@ak.blm.gov.* Persons who use a telecommunication device

(TTD)may call the Federal Information Relay Service

(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8330, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to contact the Bureau of Land Management. Jenny M. Anderson, Land Law Examiner, Branch of Adjudication II. [FR Doc. E7-11238 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-$$-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [WY-920-09-1320-EL, WYW174201] Coal Lease Exploration License, WY AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Invitation for Coal Exploration License, BTU Western Resources, Inc., WYW174201, Wyoming. SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 2(b) of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended by section 4 of the Federal Coal Leasing Amendments Act of 1976, 90 Stat. 1083, 30 U.S.C. 201(b), and to the regulations adopted as 43 CFR 3410, all interested parties are hereby invited to participate with BTU Western Resources, Inc. on a pro rata cost sharing basis in its program for the exploration of coal deposits owned by the United States of America in the following-described land in Campbell County, WY: *T. 41 N., R. 70 W., 6th P.M., Wyoming* Sec. 7: Lots 7 through 10, 15 through 18; Sec. 18: Lots 6 through 11, 14 through 19; *T. 41 N., R. 71 W., 6th P.M., Wyoming* Sec. 1: Lots 5 through 20; Sec. 11: Lots 9 through 12, 15, 16; Sec. 12: Lots 1 through 16; Sec. 13: Lots 1 through 16; Sec. 14: Lots 1, 2, 7 (E 1/2 ), 8, 9, 16; Sec. 23: Lots 1, 8 (N 1/2 ); Sec. 24: Lots 2 through 4, 5 (N 1/2 ), 6 (N 1/2 ), 7 (N 1/2 ); *T. 42 N., R. 70 W., 6th P.M., Wyoming* Sec. 19: Lots 9 through 20; Sec. 20: Lots 5 through 16; Sec. 21: Lots 1 through 16; Sec. 22: Lots 3 through 6, 9 through 16; Sec. 26: Lots 3 through 6, 9 through 16; Sec. 27: Lots 1 through 16; Sec. 28: Lots 1 through 4; Sec. 29: Lots 1 through 4; Sec. 30: Lots 5 through 8; *T. 42 N., R. 71 W., 6th P.M., Wyoming* Sec. 22: Lots 5 through 16; Sec. 23: Lots 5 through 16; Sec. 24: Lots 5 through 16; Sec. 25: Lots 1 through 4; Sec. 26: Lots 1 through 6, 11 through 14; Sec. 27: Lots 1 through 16; Sec. 34: Lots 1 through 16; Sec. 35: Lots 3 through 6, 11 through 14. Containing 10,851.115 acres, more or less. DATES: Any party electing to participate in this exploration program must send written notice to both the Bureau of Land Management and BTU Western Resources, Inc. as provided in the ADDRESSES section below, which must be received within 30 days after publication of this Notice of Invitation in the **Federal Register** . ADDRESSES: Copies of the exploration plan are available for review during normal business hours in the following offices (serialized under number WYW174201): Bureau of Land Management, Wyoming State Office, 5353 Yellowstone Road, P.O. Box 1828, Cheyenne, WY 82003; and, Bureau of Land Management, Casper Field Office, 2987 Prospector Drive, Casper, WY 82604. The written notice should be sent to the following addresses: BTU Western Resources, Inc., *Attn:* Robbie Willson, Caller Box 3034, Gillette, WY 82717, and the Bureau of Land Management, Wyoming State Office, Branch of Solid Minerals, *Attn:* Julie Weaver, P.O. Box 1828, Cheyenne, WY 82003. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: All of the coal in the above-described land consists of unleased Federal coal within the Powder River Basin Known Coal Leasing Area. The purpose of the exploration program is to obtain coal quantity, quality and seam structure information for the Wyodak-Anderson coal seam. This notice of invitation will be published in *The News-Record* of Gillette, WY, once each week for two consecutive weeks beginning the week of June 13, 2007, and in the **Federal Register** . The foregoing is published in the **Federal Register** pursuant to 43 CFR 3410.2-1(c)(1). Dated: April 18, 2007. Alan Rabinoff, Deputy State Director, Minerals and Lands. [FR Doc. E7-10889 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-22-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [NV-050-1330] Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement To Analyze the Proposed Rinker and Service Rock Products Competitive Mineral Material Sales (NVN-083153 and NVN-082069) for the Sale of Aggregates AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of intent. SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 40 Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)subparts 1500-1508, and 43 CFR subpart 3600, notice is hereby given that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Las Vegas Field Office will be preparing an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS)for the Rinker and Service Rock Projects, two proposed competitive mineral material sales which would result in two open pit limestone quarries that would merge in the future into one open pit, and associated facilities, located on public lands in Clark County, Nevada. DATES: This notice initiates the public scoping period. Written comments on the scope of the EIS should be post-marked or hand delivered to the BLM Las Vegas Field Office by 4:30 p.m., no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** to ensure full consideration. The public will be notified of scoping meetings through the local news media at least 15 days prior to the first meeting. It is anticipated at least two scoping meetings (in Las Vegas, Nevada) will be held during this scoping period. ADDRESSES: Written scoping comments should be sent to the BLM, Las Vegas Field Office, 1407 North Torrey Pines Drive, Las Vegas, Nevada 89130, ATTN: Edward Seum. Written comments may also be faxed to Edward Seum at

(702)515-5010, or submitted in writing to the BLM at one of the scoping meetings. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information and/or to have your name added to our mailing list, contact Edward Seum, Geologist at the BLM Las Vegas Field Office, or by telephone at

(702)515-5070. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Rinker Materials West, LLC (Rinker) and Service Rock Products Corp. (Service Rock) have submitted requests for the competitive sale of mineral materials along with mining and reclamation plans (NVN-083153 and NVN-082069) to the BLM for the proposed mining projects. The proposed projects would involve public lands in Clark County, Nevada, and would be located approximately 15 miles south of the City of Las Vegas in the following area: Township 23 South, Range 61 East, Section 29, South 1/2, and Section 32, North 1/2, Mt. Diablo Meridian. The project would involve the construction and development of the following primary components: Open pit quarries for development of limestone aggregate; waste rock stockpiles; aggregate stockpiles for use in the production of concrete, asphalt and other products; ancillary facilities (scales, maintenance shop, administrative facilities, and fuel and lubricant storage facilities); primary crusher; conveyor system; offices and laydown yards; ready mix facilities; asphalt hot plant; water supply well(s) and associated rights-of-way for powerlines, access roads, haul, secondary, and access roads; and ancillary facilities including growth media stockpiles, diversion ditches, and stormwater runoff controls. The mining and processing facilities would operate for approximately 20 years. During the first year, aggregate production would be approximately 500,000 tons. This rate would gradually increase over a four year period to approximately 3,000,000 tons per year. Site closure and final reclamation would be undertaken at the end of mining. The Rinker and Service Rock mining and reclamation plans will be presented to the public during scoping meetings, and informational letters on the mining and reclamation plans will be mailed to interested parties. The mining and reclamation plans will be available for public review at the BLM's Las Vegas Field Office. The BLM invites public comment on the scope of the analysis, including issues to consider and alternatives to the proposed action. The purpose of the public scoping process is to determine relevant issues that will influence the scope of the environmental analysis and EIS alternatives—in addition to the proposed action, the BLM will explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable alternatives, including the alternative of no action, pursuant to Council on Environmental Quality

(CEQ)regulations 1502.14(a) and 1502.14(d). An interdisciplinary approach will be used to develop the EIS, in order to consider the variety of resource issues and concerns identified. Potential significant direct, indirect, residual, and cumulative impacts from the proposed action and alternatives will be analyzed in the EIS. Significant issues to be addressed in the EIS include air quality impacts, blasting activities, transportation, visual resources, and socioeconomics. Additional issues may be identified during the scoping process. Staff from the BLM will be present at the scoping meetings to explain the environmental review process, the mining regulations, and other requirements for processing the proposed mining and reclamation plans and the associated EIS. Representatives of Rinker and Service Rock will also be available to describe their proposals. You may submit comments on issues in writing to the BLM at the public scoping meetings, or you may submit them to the BLM using one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section above. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. To be most helpful, formal scoping comments should be submitted within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice, although comments will be accepted throughout the development of the EIS. Comments received and a list of attendees for each scoping meeting will be made available for public inspection and open for 30 days following each meeting for any participant(s) who wish to clarify their views. Comments and documents pertinent to this proposal, including names and street addresses of respondents, may be examined at the Las Vegas Field Office during regular business hours (7:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, except holidays). Comments may be published as part of the EIS. Federal, State, and local agencies, as well as individuals or organizations that may be interested in or affected by the BLM's decision on this project are invited to participate in the scoping process and, if eligible, may request or be requested by the BLM to participate as a cooperating agency. Mark R. Chatterton, Assistant Field Manager, Nonrenewable Resources, Las Vegas Field Office. [FR Doc. E7-11208 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-HC-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [CO-140-1610-DT-009C] Notice of Availability of the Record of Decision for the Resource Management Plan Amendment

(RMPA)for Portions of the Roan Plateau Planning Area and Supplemental Information for Proposed Areas of Critical Environmental Concern

(ACEC)With Associated Resource Use Limitations for Public Lands in Garfield and Rio Blanco Counties, CO AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability. SUMMARY: In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), the Bureau of Land Management

(BLM)announces the availability of the RMPA/Record of Decision

(ROD)pertaining to all lands within the Roan Plateau planning area located in the Glenwood Springs Field Office with the exception of those areas proposed as ACECs in the Proposed Resource Management Plan Amendment/Final Environmental Impact Statement (PRMPA/FEIS). This notice also provides supplemental information and announces an associated 60-day comment period regarding four proposed ACECs identified in the PRMP/FEIS, as required at 43 CFR 1610.7-2(b). Final RMPA decisions for portions of the planning area, which include proposed ACECs, are deferred until comments are analyzed. DATES: The comment period pertaining to the proposed ACEC designations will commence with the publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** , and will end 60 days following its publication. All comments must be received no later than the close of the last day of the comment period. ADDRESSES: Copies of the RMPA/ROD for the Roan Plateau planning area and the PRMPA/FEIS are available upon request from the Glenwood Springs Field Office, Bureau of Land Management, 50629 Highways 6 and 24, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601, or via the Internet at *http://www.blm.gov/rmp/co/roanplateau* . Comments on the proposed ACEC designations should be sent to the above address. Only comments on the proposed ACECs that are identified in the PRMPA/FEIS will be considered. All comments must be in writing. Comments, including names and street addresses of respondents, will be available for public review at the Bureau of Land Management, Glenwood Springs Field Office during regular business hours, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays, and will be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from organizations or businesses, or individuals representing them, will be made available for public inspection in their entirety. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jamie Connell, Field Manager, Bureau of Land Management Glenwood Springs Field Office, 50629 Highways 6 & 24, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601, or by telephone at

(970)947-2800; or Greg Goodenow at

(303)239-3789. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Roan Plateau RMPA/ROD was developed with broad public participation through a 6-year collaborative planning process. This RMPA/ROD addresses the management of approximately 52,568 acres of public land in the planning area. Final RMPA decisions for portions of the planning area where ACECs are proposed (approximately 21,034 acres) will be deferred until comments are analyzed and considered from the 60-day public comment period. This RMPA/ROD includes management actions to meet the desired resource conditions for upland and riparian vegetation, wildlife habitats, cultural and visual resources, mineral resources, and recreation. The approved RMPA/ROD for portions of the Roan Plateau is essentially the same as the Proposed Alternative in the PRMPA/FEIS, published in September 2006. No inconsistencies with State or local plans, policies, or programs were identified during the Governor's consistency review of the PRMPA/FEIS. As a result, only minor editorial modifications were made in preparing the RMPA/ROD for portions of the Roan Plateau planning area. These modifications corrected errors that were noted during review of the PRMPA/FEIS, and provide further clarification for some of the decisions. A list of modifications is included within the RMPA/ROD that identifies the location of the corrections in the PRMPA/FEIS. BLM received 11 protests to the PRMPA/FEIS. In order to resolve one protest issue raised by the public, the BLM determined that it is also necessary to identify the four proposed ACECs and associated resource use limitations in this NOA that were presented in the PRMPA/FEIS, as well as to provide a 60-day public comment period. Therefore, the proposed ACECs identified in this NOA fulfills a regulatory requirement, and supplements the NOA for the PRMP/FEIS published in the **Federal Register** , Volume 71, Number 173, on Thursday, September 7, 2006. The BLM accepted and considered input from the public on ACEC values and potential designation during scoping for the RMPA/EIS, during public comment on alternative development, and during the comment period on the Draft RMPA/Draft EIS (DRMPA/DEIS). The alternatives analyzed in the DRMPA/DEIS varied in the number and size of potential ACECs. The DRMPA/DEIS considered the designation of no ACECs in Alternatives I and V (zero acres), two ACECs in Alternatives III and IV (11,529 acres in each alternative), and four ACECs (36,184 acres) in Alternative II. Input from the public and cooperating agencies was considered in developing the PRMPA/FEIS, which proposes four ACECs (21,034 acres). The four proposed ACECs and their associated relevant and important resource values are as follows:

(1)Anvil Points (4,955 acres)—visual resources/aesthetics, wildlife habitat, botanical/ecological values;

(2)Magpie Gulch (4,698 acres)—visual resources/aesthetics, wildlife habitat, botanical/ecological values;

(3)East Fork Parachute Creek (6,571 acres)—visual resources/aesthetics, wildlife habitat, fisheries habitat, botanical-ecological values; and

(4)Trapper/Northwater Creek (4,810 acres)—wildlife habitat, fisheries habitat, botanical/ecological values. For all proposed ACECs, surface disturbing activities will be limited to protect all relevant and important values within the areas. Such activities include oil and gas development, rights-of-way designation, and road construction. Limitations include no ground disturbance or no surface occupancy prescriptions for activities within the ACECs, as well as site specific relocation or controlled surface use prescriptions. Further, conditions of approval or permitting level requirements may be applied. Detailed discussions of the proposed protective measures for the proposed ACECs are contained in Table 2-2 and Appendix C of the PRMPA/FEIS. Dated: March 29, 2007. Sally Wisely, State Director, Colorado. [FR Doc. E7-10964 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-JB-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 70-3098-MLA; ASLBP No. 07-856-02-MLA-BD01] Shaw Areva Mox Services; Establishment of Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Pursuant to delegation by the Commission dated December 29, 1972, published in the **Federal Register** , 37 FR 28,710 (1972), and the Commission's regulations, *see* 10 CFR 2.104, 2.300, 2.303, 2.309, 2.311, 2.318, and 2.321, notice is hereby given that an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is being established to preside over the following proceeding: Shaw Areva Mox Services; Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility (License Application for Possession and Use of Byproduct, Source, and Special Nuclear Materials) This Board is being established in response to a request for hearing that was filed pursuant to a March 7, 2007 Notice of Opportunity for Hearing (72 FR 12,204 (Mar. 15, 2007)), regarding the request of Shaw AREVA MOX Services for a license application for possession and use of byproduct, source, and special nuclear materials for the mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility in Aiken, South Carolina. MOX Services submitted a license application on September 27, 2006, and after an NRC Staff review, it was determined that modifications were required. On November 16, 2006, a revised license application was submitted by MOX Services and was accepted for docketing via a letter dated December 20, 2006. This proceeding concerns the Petition for Intervention and Request for Hearing submitted by

(1)Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League (BREDL),

(2)Nuclear Watch South (NWS), and

(3)Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), which was docketed on May 15, 2007. The Board is comprised of the following administrative judges: Michael C. Farrar, Chair, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Dr. Nicholas G. Trikouros, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Dr. William M. Murphy, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. All correspondence, documents, and other materials shall be filed with the administrative judges in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302. Issued at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of June 2007. E. Roy Hawkens, Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel. [FR Doc. E7-11196 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Draft Statement of Policy on Conduct of New Reactor Licensing Proceedings AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Issuance of draft policy statement and notice of opportunity for public comment. SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is considering adopting a statement of policy concerning the conduct of new reactor licensing adjudicatory proceedings in view of the anticipated receipt of a number of applications for combined licenses for nuclear power reactors expected to be filed within the next two years. This draft policy statement is being issued for public comment. DATES: Comments on this draft policy statement should be submitted by August 10, 2007, and will be considered by the Commission before publishing the final policy statement. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods. Please include *Draft Statement of Policy on Conduct of New Reactor Licensing Proceedings* in the subject line of your comments. Comments on this draft policy statement submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made available for public inspection. Because your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against including any information in your submission that you do not want to be publicly disclosed. *Mail comments to:* Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. *E-mail comments to: SECY@nrc.gov.* If you do not receive a reply e-mail confirming that we have received your comments, contact us directly at

(301)415-1966. You may also submit comments via the NRC's rulemaking Web site at *http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.* Address questions about our rulemaking Web site to Carol Gallagher

(301)415-5905; e-mail *cag@nrc.gov.* Comments can also be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal *http://www.regulations.gov.* *Hand deliver comments to:* 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. (Telephone

(301)415-1966) *Fax comments to:* Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at

(301)415-1101. Publicly available documents related to this draft policy statement may be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), Room O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Selected documents, including comments, may be viewed and downloaded electronically via the NRC rulemaking Web site at *http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.* Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.* From this site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert M. Weisman, Senior Attorney, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone 301-415-1696, e-mail *rmw@nrc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Draft Statement of Policy on Conduct of New Reactor Licensing Proceedings; CLI-07 I. Introduction Because the Commission anticipates that the first several applications for combined licenses

(COLs)for nuclear power reactors will be filed within the next two years, the Commission has re-examined its procedures for conducting adjudicatory proceedings involving power reactor licensing. Such examination is particularly appropriate since the Commission will be considering these COL applications at the same time it expects to be reviewing various design certification and early site permit

(ESP)applications, and the COL applications will likely reference design certification rules and ESPs, or design certification and ESP applications. Hearings related to the COL and ESP applications will be conducted within the framework of our Rules of Practice in 10 CFR Part 2, as revised in 2004, and the existing policies applicable to adjudications. The Commission has, therefore, considered the differences between the licensing and construction of the first generation of nuclear plants, which involved developing technology, and the currently anticipated plants, which may be much more standardized than previous plants. We believe that the 10 CFR Part 2 procedures, as applied to the 10 CFR Part 52 licensing process, will provide a fair and efficient framework for litigation of disputed issues arising under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended

(Act)and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), that are material to applications. Nonetheless, we also believe that additional improvements can be made to our process. In particular, the guidance stated in this policy statement is intended to implement our goal of avoiding duplicative litigation through consolidation to the extent possible. The differences between the new generation of designs and the old, including the degree of standardization, as well as the differences between the 10 CFR Part 50 and 10 CFR Part 52 licensing processes, have led the Commission to review its procedures for treatment of a number of matters. Given the anticipated degree of plant standardization, the Commission has most closely considered the potential benefits of the staff's conducting its safety reviews using a “design-centered” approach, in which multiple applicants would apply for COLs for plants of identical design at different sites, and of consolidation of issues common to such applications before a single Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (licensing board or ASLB). The Commission has also considered its treatment of Limited Work Authorization requests; the timing of litigation of safety and environmental issues; and the order of procedure for hearings on inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC), which are completed before fuel loading. In considering these matters, the Commission sought to identify procedural measures within the existing Rules of Practice to ensure that particular issues are considered in the agency proceeding that is the most appropriate forum for resolving them, and to reduce unnecessary burdens for all participants. The new Commission policy builds on the guidance in its current policies, issued in 1981 and 1998, on the conduct of adjudicatory proceedings, which the Commission endorses. *Statement of Policy on Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings,* CLI-98-12, 48 NRC 18 (July 28, 1998), 63 FR 41872 (Aug. 5, 1998); *Statement of Policy on Conduct of Licensing Proceedings,* CLI-81-8,13 NRC 452 (May 20, 1981), 46 FR 28533 (May 27, 1981). The 1981 and 1998 policy statements provided guidance to licensing boards on the use of tools, such as the establishment of and adherence to reasonable schedules, intended to reduce the time for completing licensing proceedings while ensuring that hearings were fair and produced adequate records. Since the Commission issued its previous statements, the Rules of Practice in 10 CFR Part 2 have been revised, and licensing proceedings are now usually conducted under the procedures of Subpart L, rather than Subpart G. *See* “Changes to Adjudicatory Process,” Final Rule, 69 FR 2182 (Jan. 14, 2004). In addition, we have recently amended our licensing regulations in 10 CFR Parts 2, 50, 51 and 52 to clarify and improve the 10 CFR Part 52 licensing process. This statement of policy thus supplements the 1981 and 1998 statements. With both the recent revisions to 10 CFR Part 2 and this guidance, the Commission's objectives remain unchanged. As always, the Commission aims to provide a fair hearing process, to avoid unnecessary delays in its review and hearing processes, and to enable the development of an informed adjudicatory record that supports agency decision making on matters related to the NRC's responsibilities for protecting public health and safety, the common defense and security, and the environment. In the context of new reactor licensing under 10 CFR Part 52, members of the public should be afforded an opportunity for hearing on each genuine issue in dispute that is material to the particular agency action subject to adjudication. By the same token, however, applicants for a license should not have to litigate each such issue more than once. The Commission emphasizes its expectation that the licensing boards will enforce adherence to the hearing procedures set forth in the Commission's Rules of Practice in 10 CFR Part 2, as interpreted by the Commission. In addition, the Commission has identified certain specific approaches for its licensing boards to consider implementing in individual proceedings, if appropriate, to reduce the time for completing new licensing proceedings. The measures suggested in this policy statement can be accomplished within the framework of the Commission's existing Rules of Practice. The Commission may consider further changes to the Rules of Practice as appropriate to enable additional improvements to the adjudicatory process. II. Specific Guidance Current adjudicatory procedures and policies provide the latitude to the Commission, its licensing boards and presiding officers to instill discipline in the hearing process and ensure a prompt yet fair resolution of contested issues in adjudicatory proceedings. In the 1981 and 1998 policy statements, the Commission encouraged licensing boards to use a number of techniques for effective case management in contested proceedings. Licensing boards and presiding officers should continue to use these techniques, but should do so with regard for the new licensing processes in 10 CFR Part 52 and the anticipated high degree of new plant standardization, which may afford significant efficiencies. The Commission's approach to standardization through design certification has the potential for resolving design-specific issues in a rule, which subsequently cannot be challenged through application-specific litigation. *See* § 52.63 (2006). Matters common to a particular design, however, may not have been resolved even for a certified design. For example, matters not treated as part of the design, such as operational programs, may remain unresolved for any particular application referencing a particular certified design. Further, site-specific design matters and satisfaction of ITAAC will not be resolved during design certification. The timing and manner in which associated design certification and COL applications are docketed may affect the resolution of these matters in proceedings on those applications, e.g., with respect to what forum is appropriate for resolving an issue. As discussed further below, a design-centered review approach for treating such matters in adjudication may yield significant efficiencies in Commission proceedings. As set forth below, the Commission has identified other approaches, as applied in the context of the current Rules of Practice in 10 CFR Part 2, as well as variations in procedure permitted under the current Rules of Practice that licensing boards should apply to proceedings. The Commission also intends to exercise its inherent supervisory authority, including its power to assume part or all of the functions of the presiding officer in a given adjudication, as appropriate in the context of a particular proceeding. *See,* e.g., *Public Service Co. of New Hampshire* (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2), CLI-90-3, 31 NRC 219, 229 (1990). The Commission intends to promptly respond to adjudicatory matters placed before it, and such matters should ordinarily take priority over other actions before the Commissioners. We begin with the docketing of applications. A. Initial Matters 1. Docketing of Applications The rules in Part 52 are designed to accommodate a COL applicant's particular circumstances, such that an applicant may reference a design certification rule, an ESP, both, or neither. *See* § 52.79. The rules also allow a COL applicant to reference a design certification or ESP application that has been docketed but not yet granted. *See* §§ 52.27(c) and 52.55(c). Further, we have changed the procedures in § 2.101 to address ESP, design certification, and COL applications, in addition to construction permit and operating license applications. Accordingly, a COL applicant may submit the safety information required of an applicant by §§ 52.79 and 52.80(a) and

(b)apart from the environmental information required by § 52.80(c), as is now permitted by § 2.101(a)(5). In addition, we have lengthened the time allowed between submission of parts of an application under § 2.101(a)(5) from six to eighteen months. Notwithstanding these procedures, the Commission can envision a situation in which an applicant might want to present a particular ESP or COL application for docketing in a manner not currently authorized. For example, an applicant might wish to apply for a COL for a plant identical to those of other applicants under the design-centered approach, and request application of the provisions of 10 CFR Part 52, Appendix N and Part 2, Subpart D, before it has prepared the site-or plant-specific portion of the application. Such an applicant might not be prepared to submit its application as required by the rules, even considering the flexibility afforded by § 2.101(a)(5). Under such circumstances, the Commission would be favorably disposed to the NRC staff's entertaining a request for an exemption from the requirements of § 2.101. Such an exemption request could be granted if it is authorized by law, will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the public interest. Moreover, because this is a procedural rule established for the effective and efficient processing of applications, the Commission can exercise its inherent authority to approve such exemptions based on similar considerations of effectiveness and efficiency. The Commission strongly discourages piecemeal submission of portions of an application pursuant to an exemption unless such a procedure is likely to afford significant advantages to the design-centered review approach described in more detail below. The Commission intends to monitor requests for exemptions from the requirements of § 2.101, and to issue a case-specific order governing such matters if warranted. Whether a COL application is submitted pursuant to § 2.101 or an exemption, the first part of an application submitted should be complete before the staff accepts that part of the application for docketing. Similarly, the staff should not docket any subsequently submitted portion of the application unless it is complete. 2. Notice of Hearing As required by § 2.104(a), a Notice of Hearing on an application is to be issued as soon as practicable after the application is docketed. A Notice of Hearing for a complete COL application should normally be issued within about thirty

(30)days of the staff's docketing of the application. Section 2.101(a)(5), which provides for submitting applications in two parts, does not specify when the Notice of Hearing should be issued, nor is it clear when a Notice of Hearing would be issued for an application filed in parts under an exemption from § 2.101. With two exceptions, the Commission believes it most efficient to issue a Notice of Hearing only when the entire application has been docketed. The first exception is a construction permit application submitted in accordance with § 2.101(a-1), which results in a decision on early site review. The second exception involves circumstances in which:

(1)A complete application is submitted;

(2)one or more other applications that identify a design identical to that described in the complete application are submitted; and

(3)another application is incomplete with respect to matters other than those common to the complete application. Under such circumstances, the Commission may give notice of the hearing on the complete application, and give notice of the hearing on the other application with respect to the matters common to the complete application. The Commission determination in this regard will consider the extent to which any notice is consistent with the timely completion of staff reviews using the design-centered approach and with the efficient conduct of any required hearing, with due regard for the rights of all parties. Upon submission of information completing the other application, the Commission would give notice of a hearing with respect to that information. Under all other circumstances, the Commission will issue a Notice of Hearing only when a complete application has been docketed in order to avoid piecemeal litigation. 3. Limited Work Authorizations The Commission has redefined the term “construction” in § 50.10, as well as the provisions governing limited work authorizations. Section 50.10 still contains provisions for limited work authorizations to govern certain structures and associated preparatory work. Accordingly, we are providing additional guidance regarding limited work authorizations. In all proceedings, the licensing boards should formulate hearing schedules to accommodate any limited work authorization request. Specifically, if an applicant requests a limited work authorization as part of an application, the licensing board should generally schedule the hearings so as to first resolve those issues prerequisite to issuing a limited work authorization. This may lead to hearings on environmental matters and the portions of the Safety Evaluation Report relevant to such findings before commencement of hearings on other issues. Such considerations should be incorporated into the milestones set for each proceeding in accordance with 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix B. B. Treatment of Generic Issues 1. Consolidation of Issues Common to Multiple Applications The Commission believes that generic consideration of issues common to several applications may well yield benefits, both in terms of effective consideration of issues and efficiency. Such benefits would accrue not only to the staff review process, but also to litigation of such matters before the licensing board. We acknowledge that consideration of generic matters common to several applications may be possible in several contexts. For example, an applicant might seek staff review of a corporate program such as quality assurance or security that is common to several of its applications. If contentions on such a program are admitted with respect to more than one application, consolidation of such contentions before a single licensing board may result in more efficient decision making, as well as conserving the parties' resources. Licensing boards should consider consolidating proceedings involving such matters, pursuant to an applicant's motion or pursuant to their own initiative under § 2.317(b). In addition, different applicants may seek COLs for plants of identical design at multiple sites, as in the design-centered review approach, and may therefore seek to implement the provisions of 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart D. In this regard, we have amended Subpart D and Appendix N to 10 CFR Part 52 to provide explicit treatment of COL applications for identical plants at multiple sites. Because we believe that the design-centered approach is the chief example of circumstances in which generic consideration of issues common to several applications may yield benefits, we discuss that approach in detail below. While much has changed since we first promulgated Subpart D in 1975, we believe many of the concepts originally underpinning Subpart D still apply today, and we presume that Subpart D procedures, as well as other applicable Rules of Practice in 10 CFR Part 2, will be applied to applications employing a design-centered review approach. Our vision for the implementation of a “design-centered” approach under the procedures of Subpart D is set forth below. As indicated above, issues, such as those involving operational programs or design acceptance criteria, common to several applications referencing a design certification rule or design certification application may be most effectively and efficiently treated with a single review in a “design-centered” approach and, subsequently, in a single hearing. In order to achieve such benefits, however, applicants who intend to apply for licenses for plants of identical design and request the staff to employ the design-centered review approach should submit their applications simultaneously. Subpart D nonetheless affords the licensing board discretion to consolidate applications filed close in time, if this will be more efficient and otherwise provide for a fair hearing. While not required, we believe applicants for COLs for plants of identical design should consolidate the portions of their applications containing common information into a joint submission. In doing so, each applicant would also submit the information required by §§ 50.33(a) through

(e)and 50.37 and would identify the location of its proposed facility, if this information has not already been submitted to the Commission. Appendix N requires that the design of those structures, systems, and components important to radiological health and safety and the common defense and security described in separate applications be identical in order for the Commission to treat the applications under Appendix N and Subpart D. The Commission believes that any variances or exemptions requested from a design certification in this context should be common to all applications. In addition, while not required, the Commission encourages applicants to standardize the balance of their plants insofar as is practicable. Subpart D provides flexibility in the hearing process. Each application will necessarily involve a separate proceeding to consider site-specific matters, and the required hearings may, as appropriate, be comprised of two (or more) phases, the sequence of which depends on the circumstances. For any of the phases, the hearings may be consolidated to consider common issues relating to all or some of the applications involved. An applicant requesting treatment of its application under the design-centered approach may seek to submit separate portions of the application at different times, pursuant to § 2.101(a)(5) or an exemption from § 2.101, as discussed above. Under such circumstances, the Commission intends to issue a Notice of Hearing for the portion of the application to be reviewed under the design-centered approach, and a second notice limited to the portion of the application not treated under the design-centered review approach upon submission of the complete application. Such a procedure would not affect any prospective intervenor's substantive rights; i.e., members of the public will still have a right to petition for intervention on every issue material to the Commission's decision on each individual application. The staff would review the common information in the applications, or in the joint submission, for sufficiency for docketing and, if acceptable, would docket this information as a portion of each application. Each application would be assigned a docket number in connection with the first portion of the application docketed, which could be the common submission. The applicants should designate one applicant to be the single point of contact for the staff review of this common information, and to represent the applicants before the licensing board. Consistent with our guidance set forth above, we would expect to issue a Notice of Hearing only upon the docketing of at least one complete application that includes the common information. The Notice of Hearing will not only provide an opportunity to petition to intervene in the proceeding on the complete individual application, but will also provide such an opportunity with respect to the information common to all the applications, which would be docketed separately. Accordingly, upon issuance of such a notice, the Chief Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel (ASLBP or Panel) should, as is the normal practice, designate a licensing board to preside over the application-specific proceeding, and should also designate a licensing board to preside over the consolidated portions of the applications. Initially, these two licensing boards could be the same. A person having standing with respect to one of the facilities proposed in the applications partially consolidated would be entitled to petition for intervention in the proceeding on the common information. Such a petitioner would be required to satisfy the other applicable provisions of § 2.309 with respect to the application being contested to be admitted as a party to the proceeding on the common information. Petitioners admitted as parties to such a proceeding with respect to a proposed facility for which the application remains incomplete at the time of the initial Notice of Hearing would have an opportunity to propose contentions with respect to the rest of the application upon the docketing of a complete application, but would not need to demonstrate standing a second time. Those persons granted intervention are required to designate a lead for common contentions, as required by § 2.309(f)(3); as stated above, applicants submitting common information under the design-centered approach would likewise designate a representative to appear before the licensing board. In addition, the presiding officer may require consolidation of parties in accordance with § 2.316. The Commission is willing to consider other methods of managing proceedings involving consideration of information common to several applications. For example, the Commission does not intend to foreclose the Chief Judge of the Panel from designating a licensing board to preside over common portions of applications on the motion of the applicants, even if separate proceedings have already been convened on one or more of the applications involved. In such a case, however, the applicants should jointly identify the common portions of their respective applications when requesting the Chief Judge to take such action. Petitioners admitted as parties to any affected proceeding would of course have the right to answer such a motion. As stated above, upon issuance of a Notice of Hearing for a complete plant-specific application that includes information on “common issues,” the Chief Judge of the Panel should designate a licensing board to preside over the plant-specific portion of each application that is then complete. Each licensing board, whether designated to consider the common issues or a specific application, should manage its respective portion of the proceedings with due regard for our 1981 and 1998 policy statements. We emphasize that the Chief Judge of the Panel should not designate another licensing board to consider specific aspects of a proceeding unless the standards we enunciated in *Private Fuel Storage, L.L.C.* (Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation), CLI-98-7, 47 NRC 307, 310-11

(1998)for doing so are met. These standards are that the proceeding involve discrete and separable issues; that multiple licensing boards can handle these issues more expeditiously than a single licensing board; and that the proceeding can be conducted without undue burden on the parties. *Id.* An initial decision by the licensing board presiding over a proceeding on a joint submission containing information common to more than one plant-specific application will be a partial initial decision for which a party may request review under § 2.341 (as is also provided in Subpart D) and which we may review on our own motion. Such a decision would become part of each initial decision in the individual application proceedings, which will become final in accordance with the regulation that applies depending on which subpart of our Rules of Practice has been applied in a proceeding on a particular application ( *e.g.,* § 2.713 under Subpart G; § 2.1210 under Subpart L). Accordingly, a decision on common issues would become final agency action only in the context of final Commission action with respect to an individual application. Revisions of specific applications during the review process could result in formerly common issues being referred to the licensing board presiding over a specific portion of one or more applications. These issues would be resolved in the normal course of adjudication, but may well result in delay in final determination of the individual application. 2. COL Applications Referencing Design Certification Applications With respect to a design for which certification has been requested but not yet granted, the Commission intends to follow its longstanding precedent that “licensing boards should not accept in individual license proceedings contentions which are (or are about to become) the subject of general rule making by the Commission.” *Duke Energy Corp.* (Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3), CLI-99-11, 49 NRC 328, 345 (1999), *quoting Potomac Elec. Power Co.* (Douglas Point Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2), ALAB-218, 8 AEC 79, 85 (1974). In accordance with these decisions, a licensing board should treat the NRC's docketing of a design certification application as the Commission's determination that the design is the subject of a general rule making. We believe that a contention that raises an issue on a design matter addressed in the design certification application should be resolved in the design certification rule making proceeding, and not the COL proceeding. Accordingly, in a COL proceeding in which the application references a docketed design certification application, the licensing board should refer such a contention to the staff for consideration in the design certification rule making, and hold that contention in abeyance, if it is otherwise admissible. Upon adoption of a final design certification rule, such a contention should be denied. An individual applicant, nonetheless, may choose to request that the application be treated as a “custom” design, and thereby resolve any specific technical matter in the context of its individual application. An applicant might choose such a course if, for example, the referenced design certification application were denied, or the rule making delayed. The application-specific licensing board would then consider contentions on design issues, which otherwise would have been treated in the design certification proceeding. Similarly, a COL applicant referencing a design certification application may request an exemption from one or more elements of the requested design certification, as provided in § 52.63(b) and Section VIII of each appendix to 10 CFR Part 52 that certifies a design. As set forth in those provisions, such a request is subject to litigation in the same manner as other issues in a COL proceeding. Since the underlying element of the design may change after the exemption request is submitted, such an exemption may ultimately become unnecessary or may need to be reconsidered or conformed to the final design certification rule. Such matters would be considered by an application-specific licensing board. A licensing board considering a COL application referencing a design certification application might conclude the proceeding and determine that the COL application is otherwise acceptable before the design certification rule becomes final. In such circumstances, the license may not issue until the design certification rule is final, unless the applicant requests that the entire application be treated as a “custom” design. COL applicants should coordinate with vendors applying for certified designs to ensure that decisions on design certification applications do not impede decisions on COL applications. If design certification is delayed, a licensing board considering common technical issues may likewise be delayed. 3. Subsequent Applications Referencing a Design Certification Rule If initial COL applicants referencing a particular design certification rule succeed in obtaining COLs, the Commission fully expects subsequent COL applicants to reference that design certification rule. In this event, the Commission would expect to develop additional processes to facilitate coordination of proceedings on such applications. We observe, however, that an issue associated with such matters as operational programs or design acceptance criteria may be resolved through the design-centered review approach for initial applications containing common information, but we do not intend to impose any resolution so obtained on subsequent COL applicants. While there is no requirement to adopt a previously-approved resolution of an issue, and subsequent applicants are free to use the most recent state-of-the-art methods to resolve such issues, we nevertheless urge such applicants to consider adopting previous resolutions in order to maximize plant standardization. If a COL applicant adopts an approach to a technical issue previously found acceptable, no further staff review of the adequacy of the approach is necessary. Rather, the staff review should be limited to verification that the applicant has indeed adopted the previously approved approach and will properly implement it. C. ITAAC In first promulgating 10 CFR Part 52 in 1989, we determined that hearings on whether the acceptance criteria in a COL have been met (ITAAC-compliance hearings) would be held in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act

(APA)provisions applicable to determining applications for initial licenses, but that we would specify the procedures to be followed in the Notice of Hearing. *See* § 52.103(b)(2)(i) (1990); 54 FR 15395. In enacting the Energy Policy Act of 1992, Congress subsequently confirmed our authority to adopt 10 CFR Part 52, and by statute accorded us additional discretion to determine procedures, whether formal or informal, for ITAAC-compliance hearings. *See* Atomic Energy Act section 189a.(1)(B)(iv), 42 U.S.C. 2239(a)(1)(B)(iv). We therefore amended § 52.103(d) to provide that we would determine, in our discretion, “appropriate hearing procedures, whether informal or formal adjudicatory, for any hearing under [§ 52.103(a)].” While we recognize that specification of procedures for the treatment of requests for hearings on ITAAC would lend some predictability to the ITAAC compliance process, we are not yet in a position to specify such procedures, since we have not approved even one complete set of ITAAC necessary for issuing a COL. Further, ITAAC-compliance hearings are likely several years distant, and we have no experience with the type and number of hearing requests that we might receive with respect to ITAAC compliance. While it may not be necessary to consider the first requests for ITAAC-compliance hearings in order for us to determine the procedures appropriate to govern such hearings, we believe it premature to specify such procedures now. In addition, the staff is now formulating guidance on the times necessary for the staff to consider different categories of completed ITAAC, and this guidance should assist licensees in scheduling and performing ITAAC so as to minimize the critical path for staff consideration of completed ITAAC. In view of the above considerations, we have identified one measure to lend predictability to the ITAAC compliance process: The Commission itself will serve as the presiding officer with respect to any request for a hearing filed under § 52.103. In acting as the presiding officer under these circumstances, we will make three initial determinations. First, we will decide whether the person requesting the hearing has shown, *prima facie,* that one or more of the acceptance criteria in the COL have not been, or will not be met, and the attendant public health and safety consequences of such non-conformance that would be contrary to providing reasonable assurance of adequate protection of the public health and safety. Second, if we decide to grant a request for a hearing on ITAAC compliance, we will decide, pursuant to § 52.103(c), whether there will be reasonable assurance of adequate protection of the public health and safety during a period of interim operation. Third, we will designate the procedures under which the proceeding shall be conducted. We have amended § 52.103 and our Rules of Practice (§§ 2.309, 2.310, and 2.341) to incorporate these changes. III. Conclusion The Commission reiterates its long-standing commitment to the expeditious completion of adjudicatory proceedings while still ensuring that hearings are fair and produce an adequate record for decision. The Commission intends to monitor its proceedings to ensure that they are being concluded in a fair and timely fashion. To this end, the Commission will act in individual proceedings, as appropriate, to provide guidance to licensing boards and parties, and to decide issues in the interest of a prompt and effective resolution of the matters set for adjudication. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of June 2007. Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. E7-11264 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations; Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement AGENCY: Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget. ACTION: Notice of availability of the 2007 Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement. SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of the 2007 Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement. The notice also offered interested parties an opportunity to comment on the 2007 Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement. The 2007 Supplement adds three programs, as well as, includes seven existing programs combined into two existing clusters. It also deletes two programs, updates for program changes, and makes technical corrections. A list of changes to the 2007 Supplement can be found at Appendix V. Due to its length, the 2007 Supplement is not included in this Notice. See Addresses for information about how to obtain a copy. DATES: The 2007 Supplement will apply to audits of fiscal years beginning after June 30, 2006 and supersedes the 2006 Supplement. All comments on the 2007 Supplement must be in writing and received by October 31, 2007. Late comments will be considered to the extent practicable. Due to potential delays in OMB's receipt and processing of mail sent through the U.S. Postal Service, we encourage respondents to submit comments electronically to ensure timely receipt. We cannot guarantee that comments mailed will be received before the comment closing date. *Electronic mail comments may be submitted to:* *Hai_M._Tran@omb.eop.gov* . Please include “A-133 Compliance Supplement—2007” in the subject line and the full body of your comments in the text of the electronic message and as an attachment. Please include your name, title, organization, postal address, telephone number, and E-mail address in the text of the message. Comments may also be submitted via facsimile to 202-395-3952. Comments may be mailed to Gilbert Tran, Office of Federal Financial Management, Office of Management and Budget, Room 6025, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. ADDRESSES: Copies of the 2007 Supplement may be purchased at any Government Printing Office

(GPO)bookstore ( *stock number:* 041-001-00643-5). The main GPO bookstore is located at 710 North Capitol Street, NW., Washington, DC 20401,

(202)512-0132. A copy may also be obtained under the Grants Management heading from the OMB home page on the Internet which is located at *http://www.omb.gov* and then select “Grants Management.” FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Recipients should contact their cognizant or oversight agency for audit, or Federal awarding agency, as appropriate under the circumstances. Subrecipients should contact their pass-through entity. Federal agencies should contact Gilbert Tran, Office of Management and Budget, Office of Federal Financial Management, telephone

(202)395-3052. Linda M. Combs, Controller. [FR Doc. E7-11177 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3110-01-P OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Excepted Service AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management (OPM). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This gives notice of OPM decisions granting authority to make appointments under Schedules A, B, and C in the excepted service as required by 5 CFR 6.6 and 213.103. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: C. Penn, Executive Resources Services Group, Center for Human Resources, Division for Human Capital Leadership and Merit System Accountability, 202-606-2246. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Appearing in the listing below are the individual authorities established under Schedules A, B, and C between April 1, 2007, and April 30, 2007. Future notices will be published on the fourth Tuesday of each month, or as soon as possible thereafter. A consolidated listing of all authorities as of June 30 is published each year. Schedule A No Schedule A appointments were approved for April 2007. Schedule B No Schedule B appointments were approved for April 2007. Schedule C The following Schedule C appointments were approved during April 2007. Section 213.3303 Executive Office of the President Office of National Drug Control Policy QQGS70006 Counselor to the Deputy Director for Demand Reduction. Effective April 13, 2007. Official Residence of the Vice President RVGS00005 Deputy Social Secretary and Residence Manager to the Assistant to the Vice President and Deputy Chief of Staff. Effective April 10, 2007. Section 213.3304 Department of State DSGS61221 Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Economic and Business Affairs. Effective April 02, 2007. DSGS61223 Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs. Effective April 02, 2007. DSGS69721 Staff Assistant to the Director, Policy Planning Staff. Effective April 02, 2007. DSGS69722 Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Democracy Human Rights and Labor. Effective April 02, 2007. DSGS61222 Special Assistant to the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary. Effective April 12, 2007. Section 213.3305 Department of the Treasury DYGS60391 Deputy Scheduler to the Chief of Staff. Effective April 10, 2007. DYGS00490 Special Advisor to the Special Envoy for China and the Strategic Economic Dialogue. Effective April 25, 2007. DYGS60277 Speechwriter to the Assistant Secretary (Public Affairs). Effective April 25, 2007. DYGS00491 Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary (Deputy Under Secretary) International Affairs. Effective April 26, 2007. Section 213.3306 Department of Defense DDGS17028 Staff Assistant to the Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for White House Liaison. Effective April 03, 2007. DDGS17036 Public Affairs Specialist to the Assistant Secretary of Defense Public Affairs. Effective April 11, 2007. DDGS17027 Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Legislative Affairs). Effective April 13, 2007. DDGS17030 Staff Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (North Atlantic Treaty Organization and Europe). Effective April 13, 2007. DDGS17016 Defense Fellow to the Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for White House Liaison. Effective April 18, 2007. DDGS17031 Special Assistant to the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Asian and Pacific Security Affairs) Effective April 18, 2007. DDGS17033 New Media Development Account Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of Defense Public Affairs. Effective April 18, 2007. DDGS17035 Staff Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Near East and South Asian Affairs). Effective April 18, 2007. DDGS17034 Administrative Assistant to the Director, Department of Defense Office of Legislative Counsel. Effective April 24, 2007. Section 213.3307 Department of the Army DWGS60032 Special Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Environment, Safety and Occupational Health) to the General Counsel. Effective April 18, 2007. Section 213.3308 Department of the Navy DNGS07152 Confidential Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Research Development and Acquisition). Effective April 18, 2007. DNGS07194 Attorney Advisor (General) to the General Counsel. Effective April 18, 2007. Section 213.3310 Department of Justice DJGS00302 Associate Director to the Deputy Director. Effective April 04, 2007. Section 213.3311 Department of Homeland Security DMGS00653 Assistant Director to the Assistant Secretary for Legislative Intergovernmental Affairs. Effective April 02, 2007. DMGS00655 Coordinator for Local Affairs to the Director, Office of State and Local Government Coordination. Effective April 02, 2007. DMGS00654 Associate Director, Ready Campaign to the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs. Effective April 04, 2007. DMGS00656 Director of Speechwriting to the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs. Effective April 05, 2007. DMGS00657 Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff. Effective April 19, 2007. DMGS00658 Deputy Press Secretary to the Press Secretary. Effective April 19, 2007. DMGS00662 Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Effective April 25, 2007. Section 213.3312 Department of the Interior DIGS01101 Congressional Affairs Specialist to the Director, Congressional and Legislative Affairs. Effective April 11, 2007. DIGS01099 Deputy Director of Scheduling and Advance to the Director of Scheduling and Advance. Effective April 13, 2007. DIGS01100 Special Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Secretary—Land and Minerals Management. Effective April 19, 2007. DIGS01102 Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Water and Science. Effective April 23, 2007. Section 213.3313 Department of Agriculture DAGS00887 Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services. Effective April 04, 2007. DAGS00891 Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations. Effective April 06, 2007. DAGS00888 Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for Rural Development. Effective April 13, 2007. DAGS00895 Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for Rural Development. Effective April 20, 2007. DAGS00896 Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for Rural Development. Effective April 20, 2007. DAGS00889 Senior Counsel to the General Counsel. Effective April 23, 2007. DAGS00886 Special Assistant to the Administrator. Effective April 26, 2007. DAGS00892 Confidential Assistant to the Chief, Natural Research Conservation Service. Effective April 26, 2007. Section 213.3314 Department of Commerce DCGS00351 Confidential Assistant to the Deputy General Counsel. Effective April 10, 2007. DCGS00657 Confidential Assistant to the Director, Executive Secretariat. Effective April 10, 2007. DCGS00687 Policy Advisor to the Assistant to the Secretary and Director, Office of Policy and Strategic Planning. Effective April 10, 2007. DCGS00579 Director for Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs to the Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs. Effective April 19, 2007. DCGS00386 Confidential Assistant to the Director, Office of Legislative Affairs. Effective April 26, 2007. DCGS00686 Director of Advance to the Chief of Staff. Effective April 26, 2007. Section 213.3315 Department of Labor DLGS60008 Special Assistant to the Director of Operations. Effective April 02, 2007. DLGS60145 Intergovernmental Officer to the Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs. Effective April 04, 2007. DLGS60192 Special Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy. Effective April 04, 2007. DLGS60244 Special Assistant to the Executive Assistant to the Secretary. Effective April 05, 2007. DLGS60178 Staff Assistant to the Executive Secretary. Effective April 10, 2007. DLGS60230 Staff Assistant to the Associate Deputy Secretary. Effective April 10, 2007. DLGS60066 Staff Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Federal Contract Compliance. Effective April 19, 2007. DLGS60226 Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Employee Benefits Security. Effective April 26, 2007. Section 213.3316 Department of Health and Human Services DHGS60374 Confidential Assistant to the Executive Secretary to the Department. Effective April 04, 2007. DHGS60053 Confidential Assistant to the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. Effective April 13, 2007. Section 213.3317 Department of Education DBGS00609 Special Assistant to the Under Secretary. Effective April 04, 2007. DBGS00605 Deputy Secretary's Regional Representative to the Director, Regional Services. Effective April 11, 2007. DBGS00612 Special Assistant to the General Counsel. Effective April 19, 2007. DBGS00610 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Higher Education Programs to the Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education. Effective April 25, 2007. DBGS00611 Chief of Staff to the Deputy Assistant Secretary. Effective April 25, 2007. DBGS00614 Confidential Assistant to the Assistant Secretary, Office of Communications and Outreach. Effective April 25, 2007. DBGS00616 Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education. Effective April 25, 2007. DBGS00613 Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Legislation and Congressional Affairs. Effective April 30, 2007. DBGS00615 Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education. Effective April 30, 2007. Section 213.3318 Environmental Protection Agency EPGS07008 Media Advisor to the Assistant Administrator for Environmental Information. Effective April 10, 2007. EPGS07006 Confidential Assistant to the Program Manager (Operations). Effective April 12, 2007. EPGS07005 Program Advisor (Media Relations) to the Deputy Chief of Staff (Operations). Effective April 16, 2007. EPGS07003 Deputy of Advance to the Director of Advance. Effective April 25, 2007. EPGS07004 Communications Specialist to the Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. Effective April 25, 2007. Section 213.3331 Department of Energy DEGS00582 Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff. Effective April 13, 2007. DEGS00586 Director, Office of Technology Advancement and Outreach to the Chief Operating Officer for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Effective April 19, 2007. DEGS00573 Senior Counsel to the General Counsel. Effective April 20, 2007. DEGS00587 Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff. Effective April 25, 2007. DEGS00583 Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff. Effective April 26, 2007. DEGS00589 Senior Advisor to the Chief Operating Officer for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Effective April 26, 2007. Section 213.3332 Small Business Administration SBGS00614 Senior Advisor to the Deputy Administrator. Effective April 11, 2007. Section 213.3337 General Services Administration GSGS00187 Deputy Associate Administrator for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs to the Principal Deputy Associate Administrator for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs. Effective April 05, 2007. GSGS00188 Senior Advisor to the Regional Administrator (Region Viii-Denver). Effective April 30, 2007. Section 213.3384 Department of Housing and Urban Development DUGS60575 Special Assistant to the Assistant Deputy Secretary for Field Policy and Management. Effective April 10, 2007. Section 213.3391 Office of Personnel Management PMGS60057 Special Assistant to the Director, Office of Communications and Public Liaison. Effective April 13, 2007. Section 213.3392 Federal Labor Relations Authority FAGS60023 Management Assistant to the General Counsel. Effective April 04, 2007. Section 213.3394 Department of Transportation DTGS60379 Confidential Assistant to the Assistant to the Secretary and Director of Public Affairs. Effective April 06, 2007. DTGS60199 Special Assistant to the Associate Administrator for Communications and Legislative Affairs. Effective April 13, 2007. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 3301 and 3302; E.O. 10577, 3 CFR 1954-1958 Comp., p. 218. Office of Personnel Management. Tricia Hollis, Chief of Staff/Director of External Affairs. [FR Doc. E7-11217 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-39-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request *Upon Written Request, Copies Available From:* Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549. *Extension:* Rule 31, SEC File No. 270-537, OMB Control No. 3235-0597 Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ) the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. Section 31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78ee) requires the Commission to collect fees and assessments from national securities exchanges and national securities associations (collectively, “self-regulatory organizations” or “SROs”) based on the volume of their securities transactions. To collect the proper amounts, the Commission adopted Rule 31 (17 CFR 240.31) and Form R31 (17 CFR 240.11) under the Exchange Act whereby the SROs must report to the Commission the volume of their securities transaction and the Commission, based on that data, calculates the amount of fees and assessments that the SROs owe pursuant to Section 31. Rule 31 and Form R31 require the SROs to provide this data on a monthly basis. The Commission estimates that each respondent makes approximately 12 such filings on an annual basis at an average hourly burden of approximately 1.6 hours per response. Currently, 15 respondents (14 national securities exchanges and one national securities association) are subject to the collection of information requirements of Rule 31. The Commission estimates that the total burden for all respondents is 288 hours (12 filings/respondent per year × 1.6 hours/filing × 15 respondents) per year. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Comments regarding the above information should be directed to the following persons:

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

(ii)R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or by sending an e-mail to: *PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov* . Comments must be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget within 30 days of this notice. Dated: June 4, 2007. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-11156 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request *Upon Written Request, Copies Available From:* Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549 *Extension:* Form N-CSR, SEC File No. 270-512, OMB Control No. 3235-0570. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ) the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. The title for the collection of information is “Form N-CSR (17 CFR 249.331 and 17 CFR 274.128) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* ) (“Securities Exchange Act”) and under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 *et seq.* ) (“Investment Company Act”), Certified Shareholder Report of Registered Management Investment Companies.” Form N-CSR is a combined reporting form used by management investment companies to file certified shareholder reports under the Investment Company Act and under the Securities Exhange Act. Form N-CSR is to be used for reports under section 30(b)(2) of the Investment Company Act and section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act, filed pursuant to rule 30b2-1(a) under the Investment Company Act (17 CFR 270.30b2-1(a)). Form N-CSR reports are to be filed with the Commission not later than 10 days after the transmission to stockholders of any report that is required to be transmitted to stockholders under rule 30e-1 under the Investment Company Act (17 CFR 270.30e-1). The information provided on Form N-CSR may be used by the Commission in its regulatory, disclosure review, inspection, and policymaking roles. The information filed with the Commission also permits the verification of compliance with securities law requirements and assures the public availability and dissemination of the information. The Commission estimates that there are 7,300 reports filed on Form N-CSR annually and that the average number of portfolios referenced in each filing is 2.5. The Commission further estimates that the hour burden for preparing and filing a report on Form N-CSR is 7.57 hours per portfolio. Given that filings on Form N-CSR are filed semi-annually, filings on Form N-CSR require 15.14 hours per portfolio each year. The total annual hour burden for Form N-CSR, therefore, is estimated to be 138,153 hours. The information collection requirements imposed by Form N-CSR are mandatory. Responses to the collection of information will not be kept confidential. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. General comments regarding the above information should be directed to the following persons:

(ii)R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312, or send an e-mail to: *PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov* . Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice. Dated: June 4, 2007. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-11159 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request *Upon Written Request; Copies Available From:* Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549 *Extension:* Form S-8, OMB Control No. 3235-0066, SEC File No. 270-66 Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget this request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. Form S-8 (17 CFR 239.16b) under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a *et seq.* ) is the primary registration statement used by qualified registrants to register securities issuers in connection with employee benefit plans. Form S-8 provides verification of compliance with securities law requirements and assures the public availability and dissemination of such information. The likely respondents will be companies. The information must be filed with the Commission on occasion. Form S-8 is a public document. All information provided is mandatory. We estimate that 50% of the 24 hours per response (12 hours per response) is prepared by the filer for a total annual reporting burden of 46,164 hours (12 hours per response × 3,847 responses). An agency may conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Written comments regarding the above information should be directed to the following persons:

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

(1)Information concerning withdrawal of the registration statement;

(2)the fact that the private offering is unregistered; and

(3)the legal implications of the offering's unregistered status. The likely respondents will be companies. All information submitted to the Commission is available to the public for review. Companies only need to satisfy the Rule 155 information requirements if they wish to take advantage of the rule's safe harbors. The Rule 155 information is required only on occasion. Rule 155 takes approximately 4 hours per response to prepare and is filed by 600 respondents. We estimate that 50% of the 4 hours per response (2 hours per response) is prepared by the filer for a total annual reporting burden of 1,200 hours (2 hours per response × 600 responses). Rule 477 (17 CFR 230.477) under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a *et seq.* ) sets forth procedures for withdrawing a registration statement or any amendment or exhibits thereto. The rule provides that if a registrant applies for withdrawal in anticipation of reliance on Rule 155's registered-to-private safe harbor, the registrant must state in the withdrawal application that the registrant plans to undertake a subsequent private offering in reliance on the rule. Without this statement, the Commission would not be able to monitor issuers' reliance on, and compliance with, Rule 155(c). The likely respondents will be companies. All information submitted to the Commission under Rule 477 is available to the public for review. Information provided under Rule 477 is mandatory. The information is required on occasion. We estimate that 300 issuers will file Rule 477 submissions annually at an estimated one hour per response for a total annual burden of 300 hours. We estimate that 100% of the reporting burden is prepared by the issuer. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Written comments regarding the above information should be directed to the following persons:

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

(ii)R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312; or send an e-mail to *PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov* . Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice. Dated: June 4, 2007. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-11161 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request *Upon Written Request, Copies Available From:* Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549 *Extension:* Rule 15c2-2, SEC File No. 270-538, OMB Control No. 3235-0598 Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. Proposed rule 15c2-2 (17 CFR 240.15c2-2) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* ) would provide investors in mutual fund shares, UIT interests and college savings plan interests with information in transaction confirmations, including information about certain distribution-related costs and certain distribution arrangements that create conflicts of interest for brokers, dealers, municipal securities dealers, and their associated persons. Proposed rule 15c2-2 specifically would require confirmation disclosure of information about loads and other distribution-related costs that directly impact the returns earned by investors in those securities. It also would require brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers to disclose their compensation for selling those securities, and to disclose information about revenue sharing arrangements and portfolio brokerage arrangements that create conflicts of interest for them. Moreover, the proposed rule would require brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers to inform customers about whether their salespersons or other associated persons receive extra compensation for selling certain covered securities. In addition, the Commission, the self-regulatory organizations, and other securities regulatory authorities would be able to use records of confirmations delivered pursuant to proposed rule 15c2-2 in the course of examinations, and investigations, as well as enforcement proceedings against brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers. However, no governmental agency would regularly receive any of the information described above. Proposed rule 15c2-2 potentially would apply to all of the approximately 5,338 brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers that are registered with the Commission and that are members of NASD. It would also potentially apply to approximately 62 additional municipal securities dealers. The staff estimates that the annual burden for complying with the requirements of proposed rule 15c2-2 would be 18.7 million hours and that the annual costs of complying with the requirements of proposed rule 15c2-2, including the printing and postal costs for generating and sending confirmations, would be $1.05 billion. We note that many of these costs and burdens, including the majority of the annual costs and burdens, would be shifted from rule 10b-10 (17 CFR 240.10b-10) to proposed rule 15c2-2. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. General comments regarding the estimated burden hours should be directed to the following persons:

(ii)R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria VA 22312 or send an e-mail to: *PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov* . Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice. Dated: June 4, 2007. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-11162 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request *Upon Written Request, Copies Available From:* Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 20549 *Extension:* Rule 15c2-3, SEC File No. 270-539, OMB Control No. 3235-0599 Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. Proposed rule 15c2-3 (17 CFR 240.15c2-3) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* ) would require brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers to provide point of sale disclosure to investors prior to effecting transactions in mutual fund shares, UIT interests and college savings plan interests. The disclosure would provide investors with targeted material information about distribution-related costs and remuneration that lead to conflicts of interest for their brokers, dealers or municipal securities dealers. The collection of information under proposed rule 15c2-3 would require some of the disclosure that is also required under rule 15c2-2. However, in contrast to the confirmation disclosure required under proposed rule 15c2-2, which a customer will not receive in writing until after a transaction has been effected, the point of sale disclosure that would be required under rule 15c2-3 would specifically require that investors be provided with information that they can use at the time they determine whether to enter into a transaction to purchase one of the covered securities. In addition, the Commission, the self-regulatory organizations, and other securities regulatory authorities would be able to use records of point of sale disclosure delivered pursuant to proposed rule 15c2-3 in the course of examinations, and investigations, as well as enforcement proceedings against brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers. However, no governmental agency would regularly receive any of the information described above. Proposed rule 15c2-2 potentially would apply to all of the approximately 5,338 brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers that are registered with the Commission and that are members of NASD. It would also potentially apply to approximately 62 additional municipal securities dealers. It is important to note, however, that the confirmation is a customary document used by the industry. The Commission staff estimates that the annual burden for complying with the requirements of proposed rule 15c2-3 would be 18.7 million hours and that the annual costs of complying with the requirements of proposed rule 15c2-3, including call center services, and recordkeeping and compliance costs, would be $40 million. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. General comments regarding the estimated burden hours should be directed to the following persons:

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;

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

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this publication. Comments should be directed to: R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an e-mail to: *PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov* . Comments must be submitted within 60 days of this notice. Dated: June 4, 2007. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-11164 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-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 June 11, 2007: Open Meetings will be held on Tuesday, June 12, 2007 at 9 a.m. and Wednesday, June 13, 2007 at 10 a.m., in the Auditorium, Room L-002. A Closed Meeting will be held on Thursday, June 14, 2007 at 10 a.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), (5), (7), (9)(B), and

(10)and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting. Commissioner Campos, 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 Tuesday, June 12, 2007 at 9 a.m. will be: The Commission will hold a roundtable discussion regarding selective mutual recognition of foreign jurisdictions. The discussion will address the implications of granting foreign market participants access to U.S. investors under an abbreviated registration system, provided those entities are supervised in a foreign jurisdiction that has a securities regulatory regime substantially comparable (but not necessarily identical) to that in the United States. The roundtable will explore whether selective mutual recognition would benefit U.S. investors by providing greater cross-border access to foreign investment opportunities while preserving investor protection. The subject matter of the Open Meeting scheduled for Wednesday, June 13, 2007 at 10 a.m. will be: 1. The Commission will consider whether to adopt amendments to the grandfather provision of Rule 203 of Regulation SHO and the market decline limitation of Rule 200(e)(3). 2. The Commission will consider whether to re-propose amendments to the options market maker exception to the close-out requirement of Regulation SHO and the marking requirements of Rule 200(g) of Regulation SHO. 3. The Commission will consider whether to adopt amendments to the short sale price test of Rule 10a-1. In addition, the Commission will consider whether to adopt an amendment to the “short exempt” marking requirement of Regulation SHO. 4. The Commission will consider whether to adopt amendments to Rule 105 of Regulation M that would further safeguard the integrity of the capital raising process and protect issuers from manipulative activity that can reduce issuers' offering proceeds and dilute security holder value. The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, June 14, 2007 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; Other matters related to enforcement proceedings; and An adjudicatory matter. 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: June 6, 2007. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-11261 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-55853; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-56] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Market-Maker Obligations June 4, 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 30, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“Exchange” or “CBOE”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared substantially by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 4 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend CBOE's rules relating to Market-Maker obligations. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site ( *http://www.cboe.com* ), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary 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 those statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose On January 23, 2007, the Commission approved CBOE's proposed rule change to permit thirteen option classes to trade in penny increments in connection with the Penny Pilot Program. 5 In its proposed rule change, CBOE discussed the various quote mitigation strategies that it had already implemented and intended to implement. One of the quote mitigation strategies was to amend Rule 8.7 to modify the continuous electronic quoting obligation of Market-Makers and Remote Market-Makers (“RMMs”). Specifically, CBOE amended these obligations to provide that Market-Makers and RMMs shall provide continuous electronic quotes in 60% of the series of his/her appointed class that have a time to expiration of less than nine months. CBOE noted that this was consistent with its Rule 5.8. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55154, 72 FR 4743 (February 1, 2007). Because CBOE's rule filing relating to the Penny Pilot Program was only approved on a six-month pilot basis (which is scheduled to expire on July 26, 2007), including apparently the proposed change to the continuous electronic quoting obligation of Market-Makers and RMMs, CBOE requests that the change to continuous electronic quoting obligations be approved on a permanent basis. 6 CBOE notes that this quote mitigation strategy is similar to Phlx Rule 1014(b)(ii)(D)(4). 7 6 It is unclear from the approval order whether the proposed change to the continuous electronic quoting obligation of Market-Makers and RMMs was intended to be approved only on a six-month pilot basis, as opposed to the changes to the minimum increments for the thirteen option classes participating in the Penny Pilot Program. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55689 (May 1, 2007), 72 FR 26192 (May 8, 2007) (granting immediate effectiveness to SR-Phlx-2007-36). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations under the Act applicable to a national securities exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. 8 Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) Act 9 requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition CBOE 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 neither solicited nor received comments on the proposal. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule does not

(i)significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;

(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, provided that the self-regulatory organization has given the Commission written notice of its intent to file 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 proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 10 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 11 At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). The Exchange provided the Commission with written notice of its intention to file the proposed rule change on May 16, 2007. 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-CBOE-2007-56 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-CBOE-2007-56. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the CBOE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2007-56 and should be submitted on or before July 2, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-11158 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-55832; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2007-040] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Order Granting Approval to a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Waiver of Fees upon Relisting of Companies Removed for Late Filings May 31, 2007. On April 4, 2007, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”) 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 waive fees upon the relisting of companies removed for late filings. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on April 25, 2007. 3 The Commission received no comments on 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. 55645 (April 19, 2007), 72 FR 20572. In its filing, Nasdaq proposed to allow, in certain circumstances, a company to relist without paying a new entry and application fee if the company was delisted solely for the failure to file a required periodic report with the Commission or other appropriate regulatory authority. In addition, Nasdaq proposed to delete separate, duplicative provisions in its rules. Nasdaq has proposed to waive the entry and application fee for any company that was suspended 4 and/or delisted from the Nasdaq Stock Market solely for its failure to file a required periodic report with the Commission or other appropriate regulatory authority, if the company regains compliance with this requirement and applies to relist on Nasdaq within one year of the date it was delisted from Nasdaq. 5 In addition, if such a company relists during the same calendar year that it has previously paid an annual fee, the company will not be subject to a second annual fee in that same year. 4 Nasdaq Rule 4802(f) requires a security to meet the requirements for initial listing (which include the requirement to pay the applicable listing fees) if the security has been the subject of a decision to delist by a Listing Qualifications Panel, the Nasdaq Listing and Hearing Review Council or the Nasdaq Board. 5 The Commission notes that Nasdaq has the authority under its rules to waive fees on a case-by-case basis. *See* Securities Exchange Release No. 28731 (January 2, 1991), 56 FR 906 (January 9, 1991) (SR-NASD-90-61). The Commission notes that it is not, as a general matter, appropriate to allow for the waiver of fees to one class of non-members, while excluding other non-members from such class, without first providing interested persons an opportunity to comment on the proposed rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(2) under the Act. Nasdaq believes that this waiver is appropriate given that, on average, the review of such an issuer is likely to be simpler than the typical application for several reasons. First, because these companies were previously listed on Nasdaq and compliant with all requirements except the filing requirement, Nasdaq believes it is more likely that they will be compliant with all other quantitative and qualitative requirements. Further, Nasdaq notes that relevant information about these companies is already contained in Nasdaq's compliance systems. Finally, in its filing, Nasdaq states that it anticipates there would be fewer questions concerning the company's financial statements given that these companies will often have undergone extensive review by their auditors and, in some cases, by independent investigators and the Commission or other regulatory entities, in order to resolve the issues that caused the late filings. 6 6 The Commission notes that the timely filing of accurate financial reports under the Act is critical to investors and out national market and assures that investors receive up to date financial information about listed companies. Nasdaq is implementing these waivers as an incentive for companies to re-list on Nasdaq upon regaining compliance with the periodic filing requirement. Nasdaq believes that this waiver is appropriate since Nasdaq's rules governing the delisting of companies that are delinquent in periodic reports are generally stricter than those of other markets. Nasdaq believes that the proposed waivers will promote competition between Nasdaq and other exchange markets. After careful review, 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. 7 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 8 which requires that an exchange have rules that provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and other persons using its facilities. The Commission also finds that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 9 which requires, *inter alia* , that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and not designed to permit unfair discrimination between issuers. 7 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The Commission notes that Nasdaq has represented that the waiver of listing fees should not have a material financial impact on the exchange, or impact Nasdaq's resource commitment to its regulatory oversight of the listing process or its regulatory programs. In addition, the proposal does not have any impact on whether a company is actually eligible to list on Nasdaq. Nasdaq has represented that a complete review of compliance with listing standards will be conducted for any company seeking to take advantage of the fee waiver, just as for any company that applies for listing on Nasdaq. Nasdaq has also represented that any fee waiver granted under this rule is predicated upon the company successfully completing the review process and demonstrating compliance with the initial listing standards. Finally, the Commission notes that companies eligible for the fee waiver have previously paid entry and annual fees to Nasdaq. Under the fee waiver, companies must reapply within one year of delisting and are eligible for the wavier of the annual fee only if they relist during the same year for which the annual fee had previously been paid. The Commission believes it reasonable for Nasdaq to conclude that eligible companies should not be charged duplicate fees if they relist within such time periods. Based on the above, the Commission agrees that the proposed waiver does not constitute an inequitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges, does not permit unfair discrimination between issuers, and is generally consistent with the Act. It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 10 that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NASDAQ-2007-040) be, and it hereby is, approved. 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-11157 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-55861; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2007-054] Self-Regulatory Organizations; the NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change To Trade the Shares of the iShares GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust Pursuant to Unlisted Trading Privileges June 5, 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 18, 2007, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. This order provides notice of the proposed rule change and approves the proposed rule change on an accelerated basis. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Nasdaq proposes to trade shares of the iShares GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (the “Trust”) pursuant to unlisted trading privileges (“UTP”). The text of the proposed rule change is available at Nasdaq, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *nasdaq.complinet.com* . 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 III 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 Pursuant to Nasdaq Rule 4630, which permits the Exchange to approve for UTP trading a “commodity-related security” that is issued by a trust, partnership, commodity pool, or similar entity that invests in any combination of commodities, futures contracts, options on futures contracts, forward contracts, commodity swaps, or other related derivatives, the Exchange proposes to trade pursuant to UTP the shares of the Trust (the “Shares”). 3 The Shares are currently trading on Nasdaq on a three-month pilot basis, 4 and approval of this proposed rule change would allow the Shares to continue to trade after the expiration of the pilot. The Commission previously approved a proposal to list and trade the Shares on the New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE”). 5 3 E-mail from John Yetter, Deputy General Counsel, Nasdaq, to Edward Cho, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, dated May 31, 2007 (confirming the Nasdaq rule governing the UTP trading of the Shares). 4 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55386 (March 2, 2007), 72 FR 10801 (March 9, 2007) (SR-NASDAQ-2007-016) (approving the trading of 16 commodity-related securities, including the Shares, pursuant to UTP for a pilot period of three months beginning on March 5, 2007) (“Pilot Order”). 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53659 (April 17, 2006), 71 FR 21074 (April 24, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2006-17) (“NYSE Proposal”) and 54013 (June 16, 2006), 71 FR 36372 (June 26, 2006) (“NYSE Approval Order”). The Shares represent fractional undivided beneficial interests in the net assets of the Trust. Substantially all of the assets of the Trust consist of its holdings of the limited liability company interests of a commodity pool (“Investing Pool Interests”), which are the only securities in which the Trust may invest. The commodity pool, iShares GSCI Commodity-Indexed Investing Pool LLC (“Investing Pool”), holds long positions in futures contracts on the GSCI Excess Return Index (“GSCI-ER”), called “CERFs,” which are listed on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (“CME”) and posts margin in the form of cash or short-term securities to collateralize these futures positions. The GSCI-ER is calculated based on the same commodities included in the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index (“GSCI”), which is a production-weighted index of the prices of a diversified group of futures contracts on physical commodities. The GSCI is administered, calculated, and published by Goldman, Sachs & Co. (the “Index Sponsor”), a subsidiary of The Goldman Sachs Group Inc. The Trust's objective is for the performance of the Shares to correspond generally to the performance of the GSCI Total Return Index (“Index”) before payment of the Trust's and the Investing Pool's expenses and liabilities. The Index is intended to reflect the performance of a diversified group of commodities. The Trust and Investing Pool are each commodity pools, as defined in the Commodity Exchange Act and the applicable regulations of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Descriptions of the Shares, the Investing Pool, the futures contracts, the Index, the GSCI-ER, the GSCI, and the fees and expenses of the Trustee are set forth in the NYSE Proposal. To summarize, issuances of Shares are made only in baskets of 50,000 Shares or multiples thereof (“Baskets”). The Trust issues and redeems the Shares on a continuous basis, by or through participants that have entered into participant agreements (each, an “Authorized Participant”) with Barclays Global Investors International, Inc. (the “Sponsor”) and Barclays Global Investors, N.A. (the “Trustee”). Baskets are issued only in exchange for an amount of CERFs and cash (or, at the discretion of the Trustee, Short-Term Securities 6 in lieu of cash) equal to the Basket Amount (as defined herein) for the business day on which the creation order was received by the Trustee. The “Basket Amount” for a business day has a per-Share value equal to the Net Asset Value (“NAV”) of the Trust as of such day. However, orders received by the Trustee after 2:40 p.m. Eastern Time (“ET”) are treated as received on the next following business day. The Trustee notifies the Authorized Participants of the Basket Amount on each business day. Baskets are then separable upon issuance into the Shares that are traded on Nasdaq on a UTP basis. 6 “Short-Term Securities” means U.S. Treasury securities or other short-term securities and similar securities, in each case that are eligible as margin deposits under the rules of CME. The Shares are not individually redeemable but are redeemable only in Baskets. To redeem, an Authorized Participant is required to accumulate enough Shares to constitute a Basket ( *i.e.* , 50,000 Shares). An Authorized Participant that wishes to redeem a Basket receives an amount of CERFs and cash (or, at the discretion of the Trustee, Short-Term Securities in lieu of cash) equal to the Basket Amount on the business day the redemption request is received by the Trustee, in exchange for each Basket surrendered. However, redemption requests received by the Trustee after 2:40 p.m. ET (or, on any day on which CME is scheduled to close early, after the close of trading of CERFs on CME on such day), are treated as received on the next following business day. The operation of the Trust and creation and redemption process are described in more detail in the NYSE Proposal. On each business day on which NYSE is open for regular trading, as soon as practicable after the close of regular trading of the Shares on NYSE (normally, 4:15 p.m. ET), the Trustee determines the NAV as of that time. The calculation methodology for the NAV is described in more detail in the NYSE Proposal. The NAV for the Shares on each business day on which NYSE is open for regular trading is distributed to all market participants at the same time. The NAV is distributed through major market data vendors and is published online at *http://www.ishares.com* . The Trust updates the NAV as soon as practicable after each subsequent NAV is calculated. The Web site for the Trust ( *http://www.ishares.com* ), which is publicly accessible at no charge, contains the following information:

(1)The prior business day's NAV and the reported closing price;

(2)the midpoint of the bid-ask price in relation to the NAV as of the time the NAV is calculated (the “Bid-Ask Price”); 7

(3)calculation of the premium or discount of such price against such NAV;

(4)data in chart form displaying the frequency distribution of discounts and premiums of the Bid-Ask Price against the NAV, within appropriate ranges for each of the four previous calendar quarters;

(5)the prospectus;

(6)the holdings of the Trust, including CERFs, cash, and Treasury securities;

(7)the Basket Amount; and

(8)other applicable quantitative information. Nasdaq, on its Web site at *http://www.nasdaq.com* , includes a hyperlink to the Trust's Web site. 7 The Bid-Ask Price of the Shares is determined using the highest bid and lowest offer as of the time of calculation of the NAV. As described above, the NAV for the Trust is calculated and disseminated daily. According to the NYSE Proposal, NYSE disseminates from 9:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. ET daily by means of CTA/CQ High Speed Lines information with respect to the Indicative Trust Value (“ITV”), recent NAV, and Shares outstanding. In order to provide updated information relating to the Trust for use by investors, professionals, and other persons, NYSE disseminates through the facilities of CTA an updated ITV on a per-Share basis. The ITV is disseminated at least every 15 seconds from 9:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. ET. The ITV is calculated based on the cash and collateral in a Basket Amount, *divided* by 50,000, and adjusted to reflect the market value of the Index commodities through investments held by the Investing Pool, *i.e.* , CERFs. The ITV will not reflect price changes to the price of an underlying commodity between the close of trading of the futures contract at the relevant futures exchange and the close of trading on Nasdaq. Accordingly, the value of a Share may be influenced by non-concurrent trading hours between Nasdaq and the various futures exchanges on which the futures contracts based on the Index commodities are traded. When the market for futures trading for each of the Index commodities is open, the ITV can be expected to closely approximate the value per Share of the Basket Amount. However, during Nasdaq trading hours when the futures contracts have ceased trading, spreads and resulting premiums or discounts may widen and, therefore, may increase the difference between the price of the Shares and the NAV of the Shares. ITV on a per-Share basis should not be viewed as a real-time update of the NAV, which is calculated only once a day. Nasdaq deems the Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Shares subject to Nasdaq's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities, including Nasdaq Rule 4630. The Shares will trade on Nasdaq from 9:30 a.m. until 4:15 p.m. ET. Nasdaq will halt trading in the Shares under the conditions specified in Nasdaq Rules 4120 (Trading Halts) and 4121 (Market Closings). The conditions for a halt include a regulatory halt by the original listing market. UTP trading in the Shares will also be governed by provisions of Nasdaq Rule 4120 relating to temporary interruptions in the calculation or wide dissemination of the ITV or the value of the Index. Additionally, Nasdaq may cease trading the Shares if other unusual conditions or circumstances exist which, in the opinion of Nasdaq, make further dealings on Nasdaq detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market. Nasdaq will also follow any procedures with respect to trading halts as set forth in Nasdaq Rule 4120(c). Finally, Nasdaq will stop trading the Shares if the original listing market delists them. Nasdaq believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to address any concerns about the trading of the Shares on Nasdaq. Trading of the Shares through Nasdaq facilities is currently subject to NASD's surveillance procedures for equity securities, in general, and ETFs, in particular. 8 Nasdaq is able to obtain information regarding trading in the Shares and the underlying futures contracts through its members in connection with the proprietary or customer trades that such members effect on any relevant market. In addition, Nasdaq may obtain trading information via the Intermarket Surveillance Group (“ISG”) from other exchanges that are members or affiliate members of ISG, including the Chicago Board of Trade, and Nasdaq has Information Sharing Agreements in place with the New York Mercantile Exchange, the Kansas City Board of Trade, ICE Futures, and the London Metal Exchange. If at any time the Index Sponsor includes in the Index a contract traded on any other market, which results in more than 10% of the cumulative weight of the Index not being subject to comprehensive surveillance-sharing arrangements ( *i.e.* , the relevant exchange is not a member or affiliate member of ISG or Nasdaq does not have a pre-existing comprehensive surveillance-sharing agreement with it), then, prior to the inclusion of such contract in the Index, Nasdaq would

(1)enter into adequate information sharing arrangements with such other market, and

(2)contact the Commission to discuss measures that may be appropriate under the circumstances. Nasdaq has issued and would continue to issue an Information Circular to inform its members of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares, among other things. 8 NASD surveils trading pursuant to a regulatory services agreement. Nasdaq is responsible for NASD's performance under this regulatory services agreement. 2. Statutory Basis The proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 9 in general, and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 10 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. In addition, the proposal is consistent with Rule 12f-5 under the Act 11 because Nasdaq deems the Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Shares subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 11 17 CFR 240.12f-5. B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose 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. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-NASDAQ-2007-054 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2007-054. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal offices of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2007-054 and should be submitted on or before July 2, 2007. IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of the Proposed Rule Change After careful review, 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. 12 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 13 which requires that an exchange have rules designed, among other things, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The Commission believes that this proposal should benefit investors by increasing competition among markets that trade the Shares. 12 In approving this rule change, the Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). In addition, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with Section 12(f) of the Act, 14 which permits an exchange to trade, pursuant to UTP, a security that is listed and registered on another exchange. 15 The Commission notes that the Shares are currently trading on Nasdaq pursuant to UTP on a pilot basis and that it previously approved the listing and trading of the Shares on NYSE. 16 The Commission also finds that the proposal is consistent with Rule 12f-5 under the Act, 17 which provides that an exchange shall not extend UTP to a security unless the exchange has in effect a rule or rules providing for transactions in the class or type of security to which the exchange extends UTP. The Exchange has represented that it meets this requirement because it deems the Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Shares subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. 14 15 U.S.C. 78 *l* (f). 15 Section 12(a) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78 *l* (a), generally prohibits a broker-dealer from trading a security on a national securities exchange unless the security is registered on that exchange pursuant to Section 12 of the Act. Section 12(f) of the Act excludes from this restriction trading in any security to which an exchange “extends UTP.” When an exchange extends UTP to a security, it allows its members to trade the security as if it were listed and registered on the exchange even though it is not so listed and registered. 16 *See supra* notes 4 and 5. 17 17 CFR 240.12f-5. The Commission further believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act, 18 which sets forth Congress' finding that it is in the public interest and appropriate for the protection of investors and the maintenance of fair and orderly markets to assure the availability to brokers, dealers, and investors of information with respect to quotations for and transactions in securities. Quotations for and last-sale information regarding the Shares are publicly available on the Web sites of the Trust, Nasdaq, and NYSE. The Web site for the Trust also disseminates information about the prior business day's NAV and the reporting closing price, the midpoint of the Bid-Ask Price in relation to the NAV as of the time the NAV is calculated, discount and premium information of the Bid-Ask Price against the NAV, the prospectus, the various holdings of the Trust, the Basket Amount, and other applicable information. During regular trading hours, major market data vendors disseminate at least every 15 seconds the values of the GSCI, GSCI-ER, and Index. 19 In addition, NYSE disseminates through the facilities of CTA an updated ITV on a per-Share basis at least every 15 seconds during the trading day. The Trustee calculates and simultaneously disseminates once each business day to all market participants the NAV per Share. Also, futures quotes and last-sale information for the commodities underlying the Index and the CERFs are widely disseminated through a variety of market data vendors. 20 18 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1)(C)(iii). 19 *See* NYSE Proposal, 71 FR at 21084. 20 *See id.* The Commission notes that, if the Shares should be delisted by the original listing exchange, the Exchange would no longer have authority to trade the Shares pursuant to this order. In support of this proposal, the Exchange has represented that its surveillance procedures are adequate to address any concerns associated with the trading of the Shares on Nasdaq on a UTP basis. This approval order is conditioned on the Exchange's adherence to this representation. In the Pilot Order, 21 the Commission noted that exchanges that trade commodity-related securities generally have in place surveillance agreements with markets that trade the underlying securities. In its proposal to establish the pilot trading period, the Exchange represented that it was in the process of completing these surveillance arrangements and expected to do so “in the near future.” The Exchange recently provided the Commission with evidence that it has completed these surveillance arrangements. 21 *See infra* note 4. The Commission finds good cause for approving this proposal before the thirtieth day after the publication of notice thereof in the **Federal Register** . As noted above, the Commission previously found that the listing and trading of the Shares on NYSE is consistent with the Act and approved the trading of the Shares on Nasdaq pursuant to UTP on a pilot basis. The Commission presently is not aware of any regulatory issue that should cause it to revisit that finding or would preclude the continued trading of the Shares on the Exchange pursuant to UTP. Therefore, accelerating approval of this proposal should benefit investors by continuing, without undue delay, competition in the market for such Shares. V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 22 that the proposed rule change (SR-NASDAQ-2007-054) be, and it hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis. 22 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 23 23 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-11182 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #10866 and #10867] Kansas Disaster Number KS-00018 AGENCY: Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 5. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Kansas (FEMA-1699-DR), dated 05/06/2007. *Incident:* Severe storms, tornadoes, and flooding. *Incident Period:* 05/04/2007 through 05/18/2007. *Effective Date:* 06/01/2007. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 07/05/2007. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:* 02/06/2008. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster declaration for the State of Kansas, dated 05/06/2007is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Riley. *Contiguous Counties:* Kansas: Marshall. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Roger B. Garland, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-11172 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #10881 and #10882] South Dakota Disaster Number SD-00012 AGENCY: Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 1. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of South Dakota (FEMA-1702-DR), dated 05/22/2007. *Incident:* Severe storms, tornadoes and flooding. *Incident Period:* 05/04/2007 and continuing. *Effective Date:* 05/31/2007. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 07/23/2007. *Eidl Loan Application Deadline Date:* 02/22/2008. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsportroad, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster declaration for the State of South Dakota, dated 05/22/2007 is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Marshall. *Contiguous Counties:* South Dakota: Roberts. North Dakota:Richland. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) James E. Rivera, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-11170 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary Aviation Proceedings, Agreements Filed the Week Ending May 25, 2007 The following Agreements were filed with the Department of Transportation under the Sections 412 and 414 of the Federal Aviation Act, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1383 and 2384) and procedures governing proceedings to enforce these provisions. Answers may be filed within 21 days after the filing of the application. *Docket Number:* OST-2007-28314. *Date Filed:* May 23, 2007. *Parties:* Members of the International Air Transport Association. *Subject:* Mail Vote 540 Adoption, Expected Resolution 002kk, (Memo 0666) Intended effective date: 1 July 2007. *Docket Number:* OST-2007-28347. *Date Filed:* May 25, 2007. *Parties:* Members of the International Air Transport Association. *Subject:* Mail vote 539—Resolution 010t, TC12 North Atlantic-Middle East, except between U.S.A. and Jordan, Special Passenger Amending Resolution, From Israel

(IL)to North Atlantic, (Memo 0273) Intended effective date: 1 June 2007. Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison. [FR Doc. 07-2891 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 23

Traces to 23 documents

U.S. Code