Fed. Reg. Proposed Rules — Request for comment

BILLING CODE 6820-31-M NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Request To Amend a License To Import Radioactive Waste Pursuant to 10 CFR 110.70(c) “Public notice of receipt of an application,” please take notice that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC)has received the following request to amend an import license. Copies of the request are available electronically through ADAMS and can be accessed through the Public Electronic Reading Room

(PERR)link: *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html* at the NRC Homepage. A request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene may be filed within 30 days after publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** . Any request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene shall be served by the requestor or petitioner upon the applicant, the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555; the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555; and the Executive Secretary, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC 20520. The information concerning this import license amendment application follows. NRC Import License Amendment Application Name of applicant, date of application, date received, application No., docket No. Description of material Material type Total volume and activity level End use Country of origin Diversified Scientific Services, Inc. (DSSI/Perma-Fix) May 14, 2007, June 18, 2007, IW012/03 11005322 Class A radioactive mixed waste consisting of solids, semi-solids, and liquids contaminated with various materials including tritium, C-14, mixed fission product radionuclides and other contaminants Total Volume: 378,000 kg Total Activity Level: 7,500 curies Volume Reduction. Amend to:

(1)increase the total activity level to 7,500 curies;

(2)extend the expiration date to March 31, 2010; and

(3)change the licensee's point of contact Canada. Dated this 18th day of July 2007 at Rockville, Maryland. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Stephen Dembek, Acting Deputy Director, Office of International Programs. [FR Doc. E7-14566 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Notice of Opportunity To Comment on Model Safety Evaluation on Technical Specification Improvement To Revise MTC Surveillance for Startup Test Activity Reduction

(STAR)Program (WCAP-16011) AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Request for comment. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC)has prepared a model safety evaluation

(SE)relating to the modification of technical specification

(TS)moderator temperature coefficient

(MTC)surveillance requirements

(SR)associated with implementation of WCAP-16011-P-A, “Startup Test Activity Reduction

(STAR)Program.” The NRC staff has also prepared a model license amendment request and a model no significant hazards consideration

(NSHC)determination relating to this matter. The purpose of these models are to permit the NRC to efficiently process amendments that propose to modify TS MTC surveillance requirements for implementing the STAR Program. Licensees of nuclear power reactors to which the models apply could then request amendments, confirming the applicability of the SE and NSHC determination to their reactors. The NRC staff is requesting comment on the model SE and model NSHC determination prior to announcing their availability for referencing in license amendment applications. DATES: The comment period expires August 27, 2007. 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: Comments may be submitted either electronically or via U.S. mail. Submit written comments to Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: T-6 D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Hand deliver comments to: 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Copies of comments received may be examined at the NRC's Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike (Room O-1F21), Rockville, Maryland. Comments may be submitted by electronic mail to *CLIIP@nrc.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy Kobetz, Mail Stop: O-12H2, Techncial Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection & Regional Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone 301-415-1932. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-06, “Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process for Adopting Standard Technical Specification Changes for Power Reactors,” was issued on March 20, 2000. The consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP) is intended to improve the efficiency of NRC licensing processes, by processing proposed changes to the standard technical specifications

(STS)in a manner that supports subsequent license amendment applications. The CLIIP includes an opportunity for the public to comment on proposed changes to the STS after a preliminary assessment by the NRC staff and finding that the change will likely be offered for adoption by licensees. This notice solicits comment on a proposed change to the STS that modifies MTC surveillance requirements for implementing the STAR Program. The CLIIP directs the NRC staff to evaluate any comments received for a proposed change to the STS and to either reconsider the change or announce the availability of the change for adoption by licensees. Licensees opting to apply for this TS change are responsible for reviewing the staff's evaluation, referencing the applicable technical justifications, and providing any necessary plant-specific information. Each amendment application made in response to the notice of availability will be processed and noticed in accordance with applicable rules and NRC procedures. This notice involves the modification of TS MTC surveillance requirements for implementing the STAR Program. This change was proposed for incorporation into the standard technical specifications by the Owners Groups participants in the Technical Specification Task Force

(TSTF)and is designated TSTF-486. TSTF-486 can be viewed on the NRC's Web page at *http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/techspecs.html.* Applicability To efficiently process the incoming license amendment applications, the staff requests that each licensee applying for the changes proposed in TSTF-486 include TS Bases for the proposed TS consistent with the TS Bases proposed in TSTF-486. The staff is requesting that the TS Bases be included with the proposed license amendments in this case because the changes to the TS and the changes to the associated TS Bases form an integral change to a plant's licensing basis. To ensure that the overall change, including the TS Bases, includes appropriate regulatory controls, the staff plans to condition the issuance of each license amendment on the licensee's incorporation of the changes into the TS Bases document and that the licensee control changes to the TS Bases in accordance with the licensees TS Bases Control Program. The CLIIP does not prevent licensees from requesting an alternative approach or proposing the changes without the requested TS Bases. However, deviations from the approach recommended in this notice may require additional review by the NRC staff and may increase the time and resources needed for the review. Public Notices This notice requests comments from interested members of the public within 30 days of the date of publication in the **Federal Register** . After evaluating the comments received as a result of this notice, the staff will either reconsider the proposed change or announce the availability of the change in a subsequent notice (perhaps with some changes to the safety evaluation or the proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as a result of public comments). If the staff announces the availability of the change, licensees wishing to adopt the change must submit an application in accordance with applicable rules and other regulatory requirements. For each application the staff will publish a notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility operating licenses, a proposed no significant hazards consideration determination, and a notice of opportunity for a hearing. The staff will also publish a notice of issuance of an amendment to operating license to announce the modification of MTC surveillance requirements for implementing the STAR program for each plant that receives the requested change. Proposed Safety Evaluation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Consolidated Line Item Improvement, Technical Specification Task Force

(TSTF)Change TSTF-486, Modification of Technical Specification Moderator Temperature Coefficient Surveillance Requirements associated with implementation of the Startup Test Activity Reduction

(STAR)Program. 1.0 Introduction By letter dated June 3, 2005, (Reference 1) the Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF), a joint owners group activity, submitted TSTF-486, “Revise MTC Surveillance for Startup Test Activity Reduction

(STAR)Program (WCAP-16011),” Revision 0, for NRC review. By letter dated February 20, 2007, (Reference 2) the TSTF submitted TSTF-486, Revision 1, for NRC review. By letter dated March 10, 2007, (Reference 3) the TSTF submitted TSTF-486, Revision 2, for NRC review. TSTF-486 is proposing to change NUREG 1432, “Standard Technical Specifications Combustion Engineering Plants,” (CE STS) Revision 3.1 (Reference 4), to generically implement moderator temperature coefficient

(MTC)surveillance requirement changes associated with implementation of WCAP-16011-P-A, “Startup Test Activity Reduction

(STAR)Program,” (Reference 5). WCAP-16011-P-A describes methods to reduce the time required for startup testing. To this end, WCAP-16011-P-A proposes methods to eliminate the control element assembly

(CEA)worth and isothermal temperature coefficient

(ITC)measurements at hot zero power (HZP). The measured ITC is used to calculate the HZP MTC. WCAP-16011-P-A includes a method to substitute the measured verification of MTC at HZP with an alternate MTC verification consisting of the predicted (calculated) MTC and measured critical boron concentration

(CBC)at HZP. When this alternate MTC verification is utilized, WCAP-16011-P-A adds the requirement for the early in cycle MTC measurement to verify MTC is not more negative than allowed is also used to verify MTC is not more positive than allowed. WCAP-16011-P-A adds an ITC measurement at intermediate to hot full power

(HFP)and applicability requirements for core design, fabrication, refueling, startup testing, and CEA lifetime viability requirements. WCAP-16011-P-A methods can only be applied to cores that are well characterized by an existing database. WCAP-16011-P-A is only applicable to the particular plants that participated in its development, as indicated in the document. TSTF-486 will provide standardized wording in the CE STS for plants implementing the WCAP-16011-P-A alternate MTC verification at startup. 2.0 Regulatory Evaluation In 10 CFR 50.36, the Commission established its regulatory requirements related to the content of TS. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.36, TS are required to include items in the following five specific categories related to station operation:

(1)Safety limits, limiting safety system settings, and limiting control settings;

(2)limiting conditions for operation (LCOs);

(3)surveillance requirements (SRs);

(4)design features; and

(5)administrative controls. The regulations do not specify the particular requirements to be included in a plant's TS and do not explicitly prescribe specific post-refueling startup testing. However, the genesis for post-refueling startup testing can be traced to the preoperational testing required to be specified in the Final Safety Analysis Report by 10 CFR 50.34. Additionally, 10 CFR 50.36 specifies SRs relating to test, calibration, or inspection to assure that the necessary quality of systems and components is maintained, that facility operation will be within safety limits, and that the limiting conditions for operation will be met. Additionally, 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, “General Design Criteria”

(GDC)apply, in that the GDC establish the necessary design, fabrication, construction, testing, and performance requirements for structures, systems, and components important to safety. Additionally, 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, “Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants” apply, in that Criterion III “Design Control” requires that “* * * measures shall provide for verifying or checking the adequacy of design, such as by the performance of design reviews, by the use of alternate or simplified calculational methods, or by the performance of a suitable testing program.” Specifically, MTC is a parameter controlled in the licensee's TS, including surveillance requirements. As a value in the TS, MTC and the applicable SRs are subject to regulatory oversight. 2.1 Proposed Change TSTF-486 would make the following changes to the CE STS contained in NUREG-1432. • The proposed change revises the MTC (Analog) Surveillance Requirement

(SR)3.1.3.1, Surveillance, to indicate the MTC upper limit is specified in the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR). • The proposed change revises the MTC (Analog) SR 3.1.3.1, Frequency, to add a requirement to verify MTC is within the upper limit within seven

(7)effective full power days

(EFPD)of reaching 40 EFPD of core burnup. This verification would only be required if the MTC determined prior to entering Mode 1 is determined using an adjusted, predicted MTC. • The proposed change revises MTC (Analog) surveillance requirement

(SR)3.1.3.2, Note, to indicate the MTC lower limit is specified in the COLR. • The proposed change revises MTC (Analog) SR 3.1.3.2, Frequency, to replace the phrase `effective full power days' with the acronym `EFPD.' • The proposed change revises MTC (Digital) SR 3.1.3.1, Surveillance, to indicate the MTC upper limit is specified in the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR). • The proposed change revises MTC (Digital) SR 3.1.3.1, Frequency, to add a requirement to verify MTC is within the upper limit within seven

(7)EFPD of reaching 40 EFPD of core burnup. This verification would only be required if the MTC determined prior to entering Mode 1 is determined using an adjusted predicted MTC. • The proposed change revises MTC (Digital) SR 3.1.3.2, Surveillance, and accompanying Note to indicate the MTC lower limit is specified in the COLR. • The proposed change revises MTC (Analog) SR 3.1.3.2, Frequency, to replace the phrase `effective full power days' with the acronym `EFPD.' TSTF-486 includes changes to the CE STS Bases B 3.1.3 contained in NUREG-1432. • Deletes the last sentence of the second paragraph of the Background section. (Analog) (Digital) • Modifies the first sentence of the first paragraph in the LCO section to state that the COLR contains both positive and negative MTC limits. Modifies the third sentence of the first paragraph in the LCO section to state the purpose of the positive MTC limit in the COLR. (Analog) (Digital) • Inserts a new paragraph in the LCO section, between the existing first and second paragraphs, into the LCO section to explain the positive MTC limits contained in CE STS LCO 3.1.3. (Analog) (Digital) • Modifies the current second paragraph in the LCO section to include a discussion of how MTC may be controlled using CEA position and boron concentration. (Analog) (Digital) • Modifies the Surveillance Requirements section by adding a Reviewer Note describing the use of the Alternate MTC verification method contained in WCAP-16011-P-A. (Analog) (Digital) • Modifies the first paragraph of the Surveillance Requirements section breaking it into three paragraphs. The new first paragraph consists of the first and second sentences and precedes the Reviewer's Note; the text is otherwise unchanged. The new second paragraph is the third sentence of the current first paragraph; the text is otherwise unchanged. The new third paragraph is the remainder of the current first paragraph, it is modified to state the MTC verification must occur within seven

(7)effective full power days of reaching 40 effective full power days and that the MTC limits are in the COLR. (Analog) (Digital) • The existing second paragraph of the Surveillance Requirements section becomes the fourth paragraph and is modified to state the end of cycle MTC limit is specified in the COLR. (Analog) (Digital) • The References section is modified to add, in brackets, WCAP-16011-P-A. (Analog) (Digital) 3.0 Technical Evaluation As stated previously WCAP-16011-P-A describes methods to reduce the time required for startup testing. The NRC approved WCAP-16011-P-A on January 14, 2005, for referencing in license applications to the extent specified and under the limitations stated in the topical report and NRC evaluation. CE STS SR 3.1.3.1 (Analog) and SR 3.1.3.1 (Digital) are being revised to add a frequency that is required by WCAP-16011-P-A when the alternate MTC verification method is used to verify MTC is within the upper limit during startup testing. That frequency coincides with the SR 3.1.3.2 verification that MTC is within the lower limit at 40 EFPD. This frequency is consistent with WCAP-16011-P-A and therefore acceptable. CE STS SR 3.1.3.1 (Analog), and SR 3.1.3.1 (Digital) are also being revised to state the upper MTC limit is in the COLR. Currently, the location of the upper limit is not specified in either Analog or Digital CE STS SR. CE STS 3.1.3 (Analog) LCO states, “The MTC shall be maintained within the limits specified in the COLR. The maximum positive limit shall be that specified in Figure 3.1.3-1.” Figure 3.1.3-1 is contained in the CE STS. CE STS 3.1.3 (Digital) LCO states, “The MTC shall be maintained within the limits specified in the COLR, and a maximum positive limit as specified below:” Two equations then follow for determining the maximum positive limit. The use of the plural in the LCO statements indicate the STS expect there to be upper and lower limits in the COLR, of which the upper limit would be bounded by the value in the TS. Therefore, specifying in the SR that the upper limit be within the COLR limit is consistent with the CE STS. The specific wording is also consistent with current phrasing in the CE STS. Therefore, this change is acceptable. CE STS SR 3.1.3.2 (Digital) is also being revised to state the lower MTC limit is in the COLR. Currently, the location of the lower limit is specified in the Note. This change makes the CE STS SR 3.1.3.2 (Digital) consistent with the analog equivalent. The specific wording is also consistent with current phrasing in the CE STS. Therefore, this change is acceptable. The first sentence of the Note in CE STS SR 3.1.3.2 (Analog) and SR 3.1.3.2 (Digital) is being revised from, “If the MTC is more negative than the COLR limit * * *” to “If the MTC is more negative than the limit specified in the COLR * * *” SR 3.1.3.2 (Digital) is being revised from “Verify MTC is within the lower limit.” to “Verify MTC is within the lower limit specified in the COLR.” In all instances the MTC lower limit is specified in the COLR. The revised wording is consistent with other CE STS references to the COLR. Therefore, this change is acceptable. The revision to the CE STS Bases for B 3.1.3 (Analog) and B 3.1.3 (Digital) Background section is removing an incorrect statement in the CE STS that was identified during the staff's review associated with Reference 1. The TSTF has agreed to remove the sentence as part of TSTF-486 Revision 2. Therefore, this change is acceptable. The modification of the first paragraph in the CE STS Bases for B 3.1.3 (Analog) and B 3.1.3 (Digital) LCO section is intended to identify the location of the upper and lower MTC limits. This change is consistent with the proposed changes to CE STS described above and therefore acceptable. The addition of a new second paragraph in the CE STS Bases for B 3.1.3 (Analog) and B 3.1.3 (Digital) LCO section is intended to describe the purpose of the limits and reinforce that the upper MTC limit in the COLR must be bounded by that in the TS. This change is consistent with the proposed changes to CE STS described above and therefore acceptable. The modification to the current second paragraph in the LCO section adds a discussion of how MTC may be controlled using CEA position and boron concentration. While staff acknowledges that the combination of CEA position and boron concentration can be used to control MTC, the staff believes it is an incomplete discussion that ignores the effects of temperature, pressure, and power level. However, there is no intention that the STS Basis become a tutorial. Therefore, while the discussion is incomplete it is not detrimental to safety and the change is acceptable. The Reviewer's Note added to the Surveillance Requirements section describes the restrictions on the use of the Alternate MTC surveillance. The Reviewer's Note is consistent with WCAP-16011-P-A and therefore acceptable. The current first paragraph of the Surveillance Requirements section is being modified by breaking it into three paragraphs. • The new first paragraph consists of the first and second sentences and precedes the Reviewer Note, the text is otherwise unchanged. This is an editorial change and acceptable. • The new second paragraph is the third sentence of the current first paragraph, the text is otherwise unchanged. Making the sentence a separate paragraph is an editorial change and acceptable. • The new third paragraph is the remainder of the current first paragraph; it is modified to state the MTC verification must occur withing seven

(7)effective full power days of reaching 40 effective full power days and that the MTC limits are in the COLR. These changes are editorial and acceptable. Moving the existing second paragraph of the Surveillance Requirements section to become the fourth paragraph and modifying it to state the end of cycle MTC limit is specified in the COLR are editorial changes. These changes are acceptable. Adding WCAP-16011-P-A, in brackets, to the References section is appropriate. The brackets indicate WCAP-16011-P-A is an optional reference. It would only be included on plants that have implemented the Alternate MTC surveillance. This change is acceptable. 3.1 Summary TSTF-486 would provide standardized wording in the CE STS for plants implementing the WCAP-16011-P-A alternate MTC verification at startup. The changes to NUREG-1432 proposed by TSTF-486 have been reviewed for consistency with the current NUREG-1432 and WCAP-16011-P-A. The proposed changes have been found to be consistent with NUREG-1432 and WCAP-16011-P-A, therefore the proposed changes are acceptable. 4.0 State Consultation In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the [ ] State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had [(1) No comments or

(2)the following comments—with subsequent disposition by the staff]. 5.0 Environmental Consideration The amendments change a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and change surveillance requirements. [For licensees adding a TS Bases Control Program: The amendment also changes record keeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements.] The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts and no significant change in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards considerations, and there has been no public comment on the finding [FR]. Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) [and (c)(10)]. Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments. 6.0 Conclusion The Commission has concluded, on the basis of the considerations discussed above, that

(1)There is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner,

(2)such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and

(3)the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. 7.0 References 1. Letter from the Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF), a joint owners group activity, re: TSTF-486, “Revise MTC Surveillance for Startup Test Activity Reduction

(STAR)Program (WCAP-16011),” dated June 3, 2005. (ADAMS ML051580191) 2. Letter from the Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF), a joint owners group activity, re: “Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding TSTF-486, Revision 0,” “Revise MTC Surveillance for Startup Test Activity Reduction

(STAR)Program (WCAP-16011),” and “Submittal of Revision 1,” dated February 20, 2007. (ADAMS ML070510667) 3. Letter from the Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF), a joint owners group activity, re: TSTF-486, Revision 2, “Revise MTC Surveillance for Startup Test Activity Reduction

(STAR)Program (WCAP-16011),” dated March 10, 2007. (ADAMS ML071300267) 4. NUREG 1432, “Standard Technical Specifications Combustion Engineering Plants,” Tevision 3.1. (ADAMS ML062510040 and ML062510042) 5. WCAP-16011-P-A, “Startup Test Activity Reduction Program,” dated February 2005. (ADAMS ML050660127) The following example of an application was prepared by the NRC staff to facilitate use of the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP). The model provides the expected level of detail and content for an application to revise technical specifications regarding moderator temperature coefficient surveillance for startup test activity reduction

(STAR)program using CLIIP. Licensees remain responsible for ensuring that their actual application fulfills their administrative requirements as well as Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations. U.S. Nuclear Regular Commission, Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555. Subject: PLANT NAME, DOCKET NO. 50-, APPLICATION FOR TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REGARDING MODERATOR TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT

(MTC)SURVEILLANCE FOR STARTUP TEST ACTIVITY REDUCTION

(STAR)PROGRAM USING THE CONSOLIDATED LINE ITEM IMPROVEMENT PROCESS Gentleman: In accordance with th provisions of 10 CFR 50.90 [LICENSEE] is submitting a request for an amendment to the technical specifications

(TS)for [PLANT NAME, UNIT NOS.]. The proposed amendment would modify TS requirements for moderator temperature coefficient

(MTC)surveillance requirements

(SR)associated with implementation of WCAP-16011-P-A, “Startup Test Activity Reduction

(STAR)Program.” Attachment 1 provides a description of the proposed change, the requested confirmation of applicability, and plant-specific verifications. Attachment 2 provides the existing TS pages marked up to show the proposed change. Attachment 3 provides revised (clean) TS pages. Attachment 4 provides a summary of the regulatory commitments made in this submittal. [LICENSEE] requests approval of the proposed License Amendment by [DATE], with the amendment being implemented [BY DATE OR WITHIN X DAYS]. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91, a copy of this application, with attachments, is being provided to the designated [STATE] Official. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United Stats of America that I am authorized by [LICENSEE] to make this request and that the foregoing s true and correct. (Note that request may be notarized in lieu of using this oath or affirmation statement). If you should have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact [NAME, TELEPHONE NUMBER] Sincerely, [Name, Title] Attachments: 1. Description and Assessment. 2. Proposed Technical Specification Changes. 3. Revised Technical Specification Pages. 4. Regulatory Commitments. 5. Proposed Technical Specification Bases Changes. cc: NRC Project Manager, NRC Regional Office, NRC Resident Inspector, State Contact. Attachment 1—Description and Assessment 1.0 Description The proposed amendment would modify TS requirements for moderator temperature coefficient

(MTC)surveillance requirements

(SR)associated with implementation of WCAP-16011-P-A, “Startup Test Activity Reduction

(STAR)Program.” The changes are consistent with Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC)approved Industry/Technical Specification Task Force

(TSTF)STS change TSTF-486 Revision 2. The **Federal Register** notice published on [DATE] announced the availability of this TS improvement through the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP). 2.0 Assessment 2.1 Applicability of Published Safety Evaluation [LICENSEE] has reviewed the safety evaluation dated [DATE] as part of the CLIIP. This review included a review of the NRC staff's evaluation, as well as the supporting information provided to support TSTF-486 Revision 2. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the justifications presented in the TSTF proposal and the safety evaluation prepared by the NRC staff are applicable to [PLANT, UNIT NOS.] and justify this amendment for the incorporation of the changes to the [PLANT] TS. 2.2 Optional Changes and Variations [LICENSEE] is not proposing any variations or deviations from the TS changes described in the modified TSTF-486 Revision 2 and the NRC staff's model safety evaluation dated [DATE]. 3.0 Regulatory Analysis 3.1 No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination [LICENSEE] has reviewed the proposed no significant hazards consideration determination (NSHCD) published in the **Federal Register** as part of the CLIIP. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the proposed NSHCD presented in the **Federal Register** notice is applicable to [PLANT] and is hereby incorporated by reference to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 50.91(a). 3.2 Verification and Commitments As discussed in the notice of availability published in the **Federal Register** on [DATE] for this TS improvement, the [LICENSEE] verifies the applicability of TSTF-486 to [PLANT], and commits to establishing Technical Specification Bases for TS [3.1.3] as proposed in TSTF-486, Revision 2. The proposed TSTF-486 change revises SR 3.1.3.1 in the digital and analog Combustion Engineering STS (NUREG-1432) by adding a second Frequency. This second Frequency requires verifying that MTC is within the upper limit each fuel cycle within 7 EFPD after reaching 40 EFPD of core burnup, but only when the MTC determined prior to entering MODE 1 is verified using predicted MTC as adjusted for actual RCS boron concentration. The Frequency is consistent with the existing MODE 1 MTC Surveillance Frequency. The Bases are revised to describe the new requirements and to clarify the analytical basis of the MTC utilizing the suggested changes in WCAP-16011-P. The Bases modifications clarify the relationship between the MTC limits specified in the Core Operating Limits Report

(COLR)and the maximum positive MTC value specified in the LCO. 4.0 Environmental Evaluation [LICENSEE] has reviewed the environmental evaluation included in the model safety evaluation dated [DATE] as part of the CLIIP. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the staff's findings presented in that evaluation are applicable to [PLANT] and the evaluation is hereby incorporated by reference for this application. Attachment 2—Proposed Technical Specification Changes (Mark-Up) Attachment 3—Proposed Technical Specification Pages Attachment 4—List Of Regulatory Commitments The following table identifies those actions committed to by [LICENSEE] in this document. Any other statements in this submittal are provided for information purposes and are not considered to be regulatory commitments. Please direct questions regarding these commitments to [CONTACT NAME]. Regulatory commitments Due date/event [LICENSEE] will establish the Technical Specification Bases for TS [3.1.3] as adopted with the applicable license amendment [Complete, implemented with amendment OR within X days of implementation of amendment]. Attachment 5—Proposed Changes to Technical Specification Bases Pages Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination *Description of Amendment Request:* [Plant Name] requests adoption of an approved change to the standard technical specifications

(STS)for Combustion Engineering

(CE)Plants (NUREG-1432) and plant specific technical specifications (TS), to allow modification of TS moderator temperature coefficient

(MTC)surveillance requirements

(SR)associated with implementation of WCAP-16011-P-A, “Startup Test Activity Reduction

(STAR)Program,” dated February 2005. The changes are consistent with NRC approved Industry/Technical Specification Task Force

(TSTF)STS Traveler, TSTF-486, Revision 1, “Revise MTC Surveillance for Startup Test Activity Reduction

(STAR)Program (WCAP-16011).” WCAP-16011-P-A describes methods to reduce the time required for startup testing. To this end, WCAP-16011-P-A proposes methods to eliminate the control element assembly

(CEA)worth and isothermal temperature coefficient

(ITC)measurements at hot zero power (HZP). The measured ITC is then use to calculated the HZP MTC. WCAP-16011-P-A includes a method to substitute the measured verification of MTC at HZP with an alternate MTC verification consisting of the predicted (calculated) MTC and measured critical boron concentration

(CBC)at HZP. When this alternate MTC verification is utilized, WCAP-16011-P-A adds the requirement for the early in cycle MTC measurement to verify MTC is not more negative than allowed is also used to verify MTC is not more positive than allowed. WCAP-16011-P-A adds an ITC measurement at intermediate to hot full power

(HFP)and applicability requirements for core design, fabrication, refueling, startup testing, and CEA lifetime viability requirements. WCAP-16011-P-A methods can only be applied to cores that are well characterized by an existing database. *Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:* As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), an analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration is presented below: Criterion 1—The Proposed Change Does Not Involve a Significant Increase in the Probability or Consequences of an Accident Previously Evaluated The proposed change generically implements MTC SR changes associated with implementation of WCAP-16011-P-A, STAR Program. WCAP-16011-P-A describes methods to reduce the time required for startup testing. The consequences of an accident after adopting TSTF-486 are no different than the consequences of an accident prior to adoption. Therefore, this change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. Criterion 2—The Proposed Change Does Not Create the Possibility of a New or Different Kind of Accident From any Previously Evaluated The proposed change does not involve a physical alteration of the plant (no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or a change in the methods governing normal plant operation. The proposed change will not introduce new failure modes or effects and will not, in the absence of other unrelated failures, lead to an accident whose consequences exceed the consequences of accidents previously analyzed. Thus, this change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. Criterion 3—The Proposed Change Does Not Involve a Significant Reduction in the Margin of Safety TSTF-486 provides the means and standardized wording for CE STS plants implementing the previously approved WCAP-16011-P-A alternate MTC verification at startup. MTC is a parameter controlled in the licensee's TS, including surveillance requirements. As stated previously WCAP-16011-P-A describes methods to reduce the time required for startup testing. The changes to NUREG-1432 proposed by TSTF-486 have been reviewed for and found to be consistent with the current NUREG-1432 and WCAP-16011-P-A, and therefore the proposed changes are acceptable and do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Based upon the reasoning presented above and the previous discussion of the amendment request, the requested change does not involve a significant hazards consideration. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of July, 2007. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Timothy J. Kobetz, Section Chief, Technical Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection & Regional Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E7-14573 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meetings Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities and Exchange Commission will hold the following meetings during the week of July 30, 2007: Closed Meetings will be held on Tuesday, July 31, 2007 at 2 p.m. and Thursday, August 2, 2007 at 2 p.m. Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meetings. 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), (8), (9)(B), and

(10)and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), (8), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the Closed Meetings. Commissioner Nazareth, as duty officer, voted to consider the items listed for the closed meetings in closed sessions. The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Tuesday, July 31, 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; and Other matters related to enforcement proceedings. The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, August 2, 2007 will be: Institution and settlement of injunctive actions; Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings of an enforcement nature; Resolution of litigation claims; and Other matters related to enforcement proceedings. 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: July 24, 2007 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-14597 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56109; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-75] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Extension of the Customer Portfolio Margin Pilot Program July 19, 2007. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act” or “Exchange Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on June 29, 2007, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by CBOE. CBOE has filed the proposed rule as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change CBOE proposes to extend an existing customer portfolio margining pilot program (“Pilot Program”) through July 31, 2008. The Pilot Program is codified in CBOE Rules 12.4, 9.15(c), 13.5 and 15.8A. There is no change to the rule text in conjunction with this proposed rule change. The text of the proposed rule change is available on CBOE's Web site ( *http://www.cboe.org/legal* ), at CBOE's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, CBOE included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change, and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. CBOE has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Pilot Program, as previously approved by the Commission, allows broker-dealers, for eligible securities, to compute customer margin requirements based on a portfolio margining methodology. The purpose of the proposed rule change is to extend the Pilot Program for a twelve-month period, commencing on August 1, 2007, through July 31, 2008. The existing Pilot Program expires on July 31, 2007. The Exchange believes that extending the Pilot Program for twelve months is warranted in that time is needed to assess the operation of the rules, especially in light of the fact that amendments to the rule effective April 2, 2007, made equities, equity options, narrow-based index options, unlisted derivatives and security futures eligible for portfolio margining. 5 CBOE has not encountered any problems or difficulties relating to the Pilot Program since its inception. For these reasons and the reasons cited in the Pilot Adoption Filing, CBOE requests that the Commission extend the Pilot Program through July 31, 2008. CBOE proposes to make the proposed rule change operative on July 31, 2007. 5 *See* Exchange Act Release No. 54919 (December 12, 2006), 71 FR 75781 (December 18, 2006); *see also* Exchange Act Release No. 52032 (July 14, 2005), 70 FR 42118 (July 21, 2005) (“Pilot Adoption Filing”). 2. Statutory Basis CBOE believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the section 6(b) of the Act, 6 in general, and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(5) 7 of the Act, in particular, because it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 7 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(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 No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change does not:

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

(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 8 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 9 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-CBOE-2007-75 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-2007-75. 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, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of 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-2007-75 and should be submitted on or before August 17, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 10 10 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-14505 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56114; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-81] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend CBOE's Rules Related To Credit Default Options July 20, 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 July 16, 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 has designated the proposed rule change as one constituting a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule under section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend its rules pertaining to Credit Default Options (“CDOs”) in order to set out certain parameters that the Exchange intends to use for determining the applicable share to be allocated to a Successor Reference Entity if there is a CDO contract adjustment due to a Succession Event. 5 The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site ( *http://www.cboe.org/legal* ), at the Exchange's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. 5 The terms “applicable share,” “Successor Reference Entity,” and “Succession Event” are described further below. 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 aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange recently received approval to list and trade Credit Default Options or CDOs, which are binary call options based on Credit Events 6 in one or more debt securities of an issuer or guarantor. 7 The Exchange is now proposing to amend Rule 29.4, *Adjustments,* in order to set out certain parameters that the Exchange intends to use for determining the applicable share to be allocated to a Successor Reference Entity if there is a CDO contract adjustment due to a Succession Event. 8 6 A “Reference Obligation” is a specific debt security of an issuer or guarantor that underlies a CDO. The set of the Reference Obligation and any other debt security obligation(s) of the issuer or guarantor (other than non-recourse indebtedness) that underlie a CDO are referred to as the “Relevant Obligations.” A “Credit Event” occurs when a Reference Entity has a Failure-to-Pay Default on, any other Event of Default on, and/or a Restructuring of the Relevant Obligation(s). Failure-to-Pay Defaults, Events of Default and Restructuring are defined in accordance with the terms of the Relevant Obligation(s) and subject to certain minimum threshold amounts provided in Rule 29.1(c). 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55871 (June 6, 2007), 72 FR 32372 (June 12, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2006-84). 8 A “Successor Reference Entity” and a “Succession Event” are defined in accordance with the terms of the Relevant Obligation(s). *See* Rule 29.4(a)(1)(i). By way of background, the cash settlement amount for a CDO is generally $100,000 per contract (equal to an exercise settlement value of $100 multiplied by a contract multiplier of 1,000) upon automatic exercise if the Exchange confirms a Credit Event. 9 If a Credit Event is not confirmed, the cash settlement value will be $0. Among other things, Rule 29.4 provides that CDO contracts will be subject to adjustment and replaced by one or more CDOs derived from Successor Reference Entities based on the applicable share of each Successor Reference Entity. The “applicable share” is a percentage amount used to determine the adjusted cash settlement amount and adjusted contract multiplier applicable to each replacement CDO. 10 For example, if there are two Successor Reference Entities that each have an applicable share of 50%, the cash settlement amount for each replacement CDO would be $50,000 (equal to an exercise settlement value of $100 multiplied by the revised contract multiplier of 500). 9 *See* Rule 29.1(a). 10 Every determination by the Exchange pursuant to Rule 29.4 is within the Exchange's sole discretion, is conclusive and binding on all holders and sellers, and is not subject to review. *See* Rule 29.4(d). Currently, the rule is silent regarding the calculation of the applicable share. Based on feedback from potential CDO investors and in order to provide more clarity and certainty to such investors, the Exchange is proposing to codify certain parameters that it intends to utilize in determining the applicable share. As set out in the proposed revisions to the rule text, in determining the applicable share the Exchange, as a general rule, would allocate an equal share to each Successor Reference Entity that has succeeded the Reference Entity as issuer and guarantor of

(i)at least one Relevant Obligation and

(ii)at least 25% of the principal amount of the original Reference Entity's outstanding debt obligations other than non-recourse indebtedness. If no Successor Reference Entity satisfies the “at least 25%” requirement and the original Reference Entity does not survive following the Succession Event, an equal share will be allocated to the Successor Reference Entity(ies) that succeeded to the largest percentage of the original Reference Entity's outstanding debt obligations other than non-recourse indebtedness. 11 These applicable share parameters would override any contradictory provision in the Relevant Obligation(s) terms. In addition, the Exchange intends to apply these parameters to all presently listed and any future-listed CDO contracts. 11 If no Successor Reference Entity satisfies the “at least 25%” requirement and the original Reference Entity survives, then no Succession Event will be deemed to have occurred and the CDO contract will not be adjusted. The following examples illustrate the application of the parameters: • Assume a Succession Event is confirmed by the Exchange in a Reference Entity with $100 million outstanding in debt obligations and, under the terms of the Succession Event, Successor Reference Entity A succeeds to certain Relevant Obligations and other debt obligations totaling $40 million (40% of the original Reference Entity's outstanding debt obligations), Successor Reference Entity B succeeds to certain Relevant Obligations and other debt obligations totaling $30 million (30%), and Successor Reference Entity C succeeds to all other Relevant Obligations and other debt obligations totaling $30 million (30%). A CDO contract overlying Relevant Obligations on the original Reference Entity would be adjusted and replaced with three new CDOs, one each for Successor Reference Entities A, B and C, and each having an equal share value equivalent to 33.333%, the “applicable share,” of the original CDO contract ( *e.g.* , 33.333% of $100,000, or $33,333, which is equal to an exercise settlement value of $100 multiplied by the revised contract multiplier of 333.33). • Assume a Succession Event is confirmed by the Exchange in a Reference Entity with $100 million outstanding in debt obligations and, under the terms of the Succession Event, Successor Reference Entity A succeeds to certain Relevant Obligations and other debt obligations totaling $45 million (45% of the original Reference Entity's outstanding debt obligations), Successor Reference Entity B succeeds to certain Relevant Obligations and other debt obligations totaling $40 million (40%), and Successor Reference Entity C succeeds to all other Relevant Obligations and other debt obligations totaling $15 million (15%). A CDO contract overlying Relevant Obligations on the original Reference Entity would be adjusted and replaced with two new CDOs, one each for Successor Reference Entities A and B, and each having an equal share value equivalent to 50% of the original CDO contract ( *e.g.* , 50% of $100,000, or $50,000, which is equal to an exercise settlement value of $100 multiplied by the revised contract multiplier of 500). Successor Reference Entity C's applicable share would be 0. • Assume a Succession Event is confirmed by the Exchange in a Reference Entity with $100 million outstanding in debt obligations and, under the terms of the Succession Event, Successor Reference Entities A and B each succeed to certain Relevant Obligations and other debt obligations totaling $23 million each (23% of the original Reference Entity's outstanding debt obligations) and Successor Reference Entities C, D and E each succeed to certain Relevant Obligations and other debt obligations totaling $18 million each (18%). A CDO contract overlying Relevant Obligations on the original Reference Entity would be adjusted and replaced with two new CDOs, one each for Successor Reference Entities A and B, and each having an equal share value equivalent to 50% of the original CDO contract ( *e.g.* , 50% of $100,000, or $50,000, which is equal to an exercise settlement value of $100 multiplied by the revised contract multiplier of 500). Successor Reference Entities C, D and E's applicable shares would be 0. As indicated above, the Exchange is proposing to codify these parameters for determining the applicable share of each Successor Reference Entity based on feedback we have received thus far from potential CDO investors. The Exchange believes that setting forth these parameters would clarify how the Exchange intends to administer the Succession Event confirmation process, thereby affording investors additional clarity and certainty regarding the impact of a Succession Event on an outstanding CDO contract. The Exchange also understands that these parameters would be substantially similar to and generally consistent with the practice in the over-the-counter market. Finally, the Exchange is also proposing a non-substantive change to Rule 29.4. Specifically, the Exchange is substituting the phrase “the adjusted cash settlement amount(s) and the adjusted contract multiplier(s)” for “adjusted unit of trading and the adjusted exercise price” in paragraph

(c)to be consistent with the use and meaning of those terms elsewhere in the rule text. 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 national securities exchanges. Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the section 6(b)(5) 12 which requires that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts, to remove impediments to and to perfect the mechanism for a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. As indicated above, the Exchange believes that setting forth the “applicable share” parameters would clarify how the Exchange intends to administer the Succession Event confirmation process, thereby affording investors additional clarity and certainty regarding the impact of a Succession Event on an outstanding CDO contract. 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposal. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change constitutes a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule, it has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 13 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder. 14 At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to: *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-CBOE-2007-81 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2007-81. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of 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-2007-81 and should be submitted on or before August 17, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). [FR Doc. E7-14507 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56117; File No. SR-ISE-2007-47 Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, To Adopt Generic Listing Standards for Index-Linked Securities July 23, 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 June 26, 2007, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (“ISE” 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. On July 17, 2007, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. This order provides notice of the proposed rule change, as amended, and approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, 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 The Exchange proposes to

(1)Adopt generic listing standards for equity index-linked securities (“Equity Index-Linked Securities”), commodity-linked securities (“Commodity-Linked Securities”), and currency-linked securities (“Currency-Linked Securities,” and together with Equity Index-Linked Securities and Commodity-Linked Securities, collectively, “Index-Linked Securities”) under new ISE Rule 2130, and

(2)make conforming changes to ISE Rules 2100 and 2101 in regard to the adoption of the generic listing standards for Index-Linked Securities. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.ise.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 The Exchange proposes to adopt new ISE Rule 2130 (Equity Index-Linked Securities, Commodity-Linked Securities and Currency-Linked Securities), which would provide generic listing standards to permit the trading of Index-Linked Securities on the Exchange pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act. 3 The Exchange seeks to be able to list and/or trade Index-Linked Securities without individual Commission approval of each such product pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act. 4 In addition, the Exchange proposes to amend ISE Rule 2101(a) to add Index-Linked Securities to the list of securities that will only trade on the Exchange pursuant to unlisted trading privileges (“UTP”). Thus, while the proposal would allow the Exchange to trade Index-Linked Securities by either listing or trading pursuant to UTP, the Exchange would only trade Index-Linked Securities pursuant to UTP. In order to trade by listing such Index-Linked Securities on the Exchange, the Exchange would first need to seek Commission approval and amend its rules. Finally, the Exchange proposes to amend ISE Rule 2100(c)(7) to add Index-Linked Securities to the definition of Equity Securities. 3 Rule 19b-4(e) provides that the listing and trading of a new derivative securities product by a self-regulatory organization (“SRO”) shall not be deemed a proposed rule change if the Commission has approved the SRO's trading rules, procedures, and listing standards for the product class that would include the new derivatives securities product, and the SRO has a surveillance program for the product class. *See* 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e)(1). 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). The Exchange represents that any securities it lists and/or trades pursuant to proposed ISE Rule 2130 will satisfy the standards set forth therein. The Exchange states that within five business days after commencement of trading of an Index-Linked Security in reliance on proposed ISE Rule 2130, the Exchange will file a Form 19b-4(e) with the Commission. 5 5 *See* 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e)(2)(ii) and 17 CFR 249.820. Index-Linked Securities Index-Linked Securities are designed for investors who desire to participate in a specific market segment by providing exposure to one or more identifiable underlying securities, commodities, currencies, derivative instruments, or market indexes of the foregoing (the “Underlying Index” or “Underlying Indexes”). 6 Index-Linked Securities are the non-convertible debt of an issuer that have a term of at least one year, but not greater than thirty years, and are tied to the performance of the Underlying Index. 7 Index-Linked Securities may or may not make interest payments based on dividends or other cash distributions paid on the components comprising the Underlying Index or Indexes to the holder during their term. Despite the fact that Index-Linked Securities are linked to an Underlying Index, each will trade as a single, exchange-listed security. 6 The Exchange states that the holder of an Index-Linked Security may or may not be fully exposed to the appreciation and/or depreciation of the underlying component assets. For example, an Index-Linked Security may be subject to a “cap” on the maximum principal amount to be repaid to holders or a “floor” on the minimum principal amount to be repaid to holders at maturity. 7 E-mail from Laura Clare, Assistant General Counsel, ISE, to Edward Cho, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, dated July 18, 2007 (confirming the description of Index-Linked Securities). The Exchange represents that the proposed generic listing standards will not be applicable to Index-Linked Securities with respect to which the payment at maturity is based on a multiple of negative performance of an Underlying Index or Indexes. An Index-Linked Security may or may not provide “principal protection,” *i.e.* , a minimum guaranteed amount to be repaid. 8 The Exchange believes that the flexibility to list a variety of Index-Linked Securities will offer investors the opportunity to more precisely focus their specific investment strategies. 8 Some Index-Linked Securities may provide for “contingent” protection of the principal amount, whereby the principal protection may disappear if the Underlying Index at any point in time during the life of such security reaches a certain predetermined level. Index-Linked Securities do not give the holder any right to receive a portfolio component, dividend payments, or any other ownership right or interest in the portfolio or underlying components comprising the Underlying Index. Pursuant to proposed ISE Rule 2130, the current or composite value of the Underlying Index will be widely disseminated at least every 15 seconds during the trading day. Proposed Listing Criteria for Index-Linked Securities The Exchange will apply the following requirements to all issuers of Index-Linked Securities:

(A)If the issuer is a company listed on the New York Stock Exchange, NYSE Arca, Inc., American Stock Exchange LLC, or The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, the entity must be a company in good standing ( *i.e.* , meets the continued listing criteria of such exchange). If not listed, the issuer must meet the following criteria:

(i)The issuer shall have assets in excess of $100 million and stockholders' equity of at least $10 million. In the case of an issuer which is unable to satisfy the earnings criteria set forth in

(ii)below, the Exchange generally will require the issuer to have the following:

(x)assets in excess of $200 million and stockholders' equity of at least $10 million; or

(y)assets in excess of $100 million and stockholders' equity of at least $20 million.

(ii)The issuer's pre-tax income from continuing operations shall substantially exceed $750,000 in its last fiscal year, or in two of its last three fiscal years (sovereign issuers will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis).

(B)The issuer will be expected to have a minimum tangible net worth 9 of $250,000,000. In the alternative, the issuer will be expected:

(i)To have a minimum tangible net worth of $150,000,000; and

(ii)not to have issued Index-Linked Securities, the original issue price of which, combined with all the issuer's other Index-Linked Securities listed on a national securities exchange, exceeds 25% of the issuer's tangible net worth at the time of issuance. If the Index-Linked Securities are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by an affiliate of the issuer, the Exchange will rely on such affiliate's tangible net worth for purposes of these requirements and will include in its calculation all Index-Linked Securities that are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by such affiliate. 9 “Tangible net worth” is defined as total assets, *less* intangible assets and total liabilities. Intangibles include non-material benefits such as goodwill, patents, copyrights, and trademarks.

(C)The issuer must be in compliance with Rule 10A-3 under the Act. 10 10 *See* 17 CFR 240.10A-3 (setting forth the listing standards relating to audit committees). The Exchange will apply the following requirements to each issue of Index-Linked Securities:

(1)The issue must have

(a)A minimum public distribution of at least 1 million units, except if the Index-Linked Securities are traded in thousand dollar denominations, and

(b)at least 400 holders, except if the Index-Linked Securities are redeemable at the option of the holders thereof on at least a weekly basis 11 or the Index-Linked Securities are traded in thousand dollar denominations; 11 E-mail from Laura Clare, Assistant General Counsel, ISE, to Edward Cho, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, dated July 18, 2007 (clarifying the exceptions to the holder distribution requirement).

(2)The issue must have a principal amount/aggregate market value of not less than $4 million;

(3)The issue must have a term of at least one year, but not greater than thirty years;

(4)The issue must be the non-convertible debt of the issuer; and

(5)The issue must not base its payment at maturity on a multiple of the negative performance of an Underlying Index or Indexes, although the payment at maturity may or may not provide for a multiple of the positive performance of an Underlying Index or Indexes. Index-Linked Securities must have at least 400 holders at the time of listing, except if the Index-Linked Securities are traded in thousand dollar denominations or the Index-Linked Securities are redeemable at the option of the holders thereof on at least a weekly basis. The Exchange believes that a weekly redemption right will ensure a strong correlation between the market price of the Index-Linked Securities and the performance of the Underlying Index, as holders will be unlikely to sell their Index-Linked Securities for less than their redemption value if they have a weekly right to be redeemed for their full value. In addition, in the case of Index-Linked Securities with a weekly redemption feature, the issuer has the ability to issue new Index-Linked Securities from time to time at the indicative value at the time of such sale. This provides a ready supply of new Index-Linked Securities, thereby lessening the possibility that the market price of such securities will be affected by a scarcity of available Index-Linked Securities for sale. It also assists in maintaining a strong correlation between the market price and the indicative value, as investors will be unlikely to pay more than the indicative value in the open market if they can acquire Index-Linked Securities from the issuer at that price. The ability to list Index-Linked Securities with these characteristics without any specific requirements as to the number of holders is important to the successful listing of such securities. Issuers issuing these types of Index-Linked Securities generally do not intend to do so by way of an underwritten offering. Rather, the distribution arrangement is analogous to that of an exchange traded fund issuance, in that the issue is launched without any significant distribution event, and the float increases over time as investors purchase additional securities from the issuer at the then indicative value. Investors will generally seek to purchase the securities at a point when the Underlying Index is at a level that they perceive as providing an attractive growth opportunity. In the context of such a distribution arrangement, it is difficult for an issuer to guarantee its ability to sell to sufficient investors on the listing date to meet a specific number-of-holders requirement. However, the Exchange believes that this difficulty in ensuring 400 holders on the listing date is not indicative of a likely long-term lack of liquidity in Index-Linked Securities or, for the reasons set forth in the prior paragraph, of a difficulty in establishing a pricing equilibrium in the Index-Linked Securities or a successful two-sided market. Equity Index-Linked Securities Listing Standards Equity Index-Linked Securities will be subject to the criteria in proposed ISE Rule 2130(c) for initial and continued listing. For an Underlying Index to be appropriate for the initial listing of an Equity Index-Linked Security, such Underlying Index must be comprised of at least ten component securities of different issuers. The Underlying Index must also either

(i)be approved for the trading of options or other derivative securities by the Commission under section 19(b)(2) of the Act 12 and rules thereunder, and the conditions set forth in the Commission's approval order, including comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements for non-U.S. stocks, continue to be satisfied, or

(ii)meet the following requirements: 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). • Each component security must have a minimum market value of at least $75 million, except that, for each of the lowest dollar-weighted component securities in the Underlying Index that in the aggregate account for no more than 10% of the dollar weight of such Underlying Index, the market value can be at least $50 million; • Each component security must have a trading volume in each of the last six months of not less than 1,000,000 shares, except that for each of the lowest dollar-weighted component securities in the Underlying Index that, in the aggregate, account for no more than 10% of the dollar weight of such Underlying Index, the trading volume shall be at least 500,000 shares in each of the last six months; • Underlying Indexes based upon the equal-dollar or modified equal-dollar weighting methodology must be rebalanced at least quarterly; • In the case of a capitalization-weighted or modified capitalization-weighted Underlying Index, the lesser of the five highest dollar-weighted component securities in the Underlying Index or the highest dollar-weighted component securities in the Underlying Index that, in the aggregate, represent at least 30% of the total number of component securities in the Underlying Index, each have an average monthly trading volume of at least 2,000,000 shares over the previous six months; • No component security can represent more than 25% of the dollar weight of the Underlying Index, and the five highest dollar-weighted component securities in the Underlying Index cannot, in the aggregate, account for more than 50% of the dollar weight of the Underlying Index (60% for an Underlying Index consisting of fewer than 25 component securities); • 90% of the Underlying Index's dollar weight and at least 80% of the total number of component securities must meet the then current criteria for standardized options trading on a national securities exchange; and • All component securities must either

(A)be securities (other than foreign country securities and American Depository Receipts (“ADRs”)) that are issued by a reporting company under the Act that is listed on a national securities exchange and be an “NMS stock,” as defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS, 13 or

(B)be foreign country securities or ADRs, provided that foreign country securities or foreign country securities underlying ADRs having their primary trading market outside the United States on foreign trading markets that are not members of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (“ISG”) or parties to comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements with the Exchange cannot, in the aggregate, represent more than 20% of the dollar weight of the Underlying Index. 13 *See* 17 CFR 242.600(b)(47). The Exchange would commence delisting or removal proceedings of an Equity Index-Linked Security if any of the standards set forth in the initial eligibility criteria are not continuously maintained, except that: • The criteria that no single component represent more than 25% of the dollar weight of the Underlying Index and the five highest dollar-weighted components in the Underlying Index cannot represent more than 50% (or 60% for Underlying Indexes with less than 25 components) of the dollar weight of the Underlying Index, need only be satisfied for capitalization-weighted, modified capitalization-weighted, and price-weighted Underlying Indexes as of the first day of January and July in each year; • The total number of components in the Underlying Index may not increase or decrease by more than 33 1/3 % from the number of components in the Underlying Index at the time of its initial listing, and in no event may be less than ten components; • The trading volume of each component security in the Underlying Index must be at least 500,000 shares for each of the last six months, except that for each of the lowest dollar-weighted components in the Underlying Index that, in the aggregate, account for no more than 10% of the dollar weight of the Underlying Index, trading volume must be at least 400,000 shares for each of the last six months; and • For a capitalization-weighted or modified capitalization-weighted Underlying Index, the lesser of the five highest dollar-weighted component securities in the Underlying Index or the highest dollar-weighted component securities in the Underlying Index that, in the aggregate, represent at least 30% of the total number of stocks in the Underlying Index must have an average monthly trading volume of at least 1,000,000 shares over the previous six months. In connection with an Equity Index-Linked Security, the Exchange will commence delisting or removal proceedings if an Underlying Index or Indexes fails to satisfy the maintenance standards or conditions for such Underlying Index or Indexes, as set forth by the Commission in its order under section 19(b)(2) of the Act 14 approving the Underlying Index or Indexes for the trading of options or other derivatives. The Exchange will also commence delisting or removal proceedings of an Equity Index-Linked Security under any of the following circumstances: 14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). • If the aggregate market value or the principal amount of the Equity Index-Linked Securities publicly held is less than $400,000; • If the value of the Underlying Index or composite value of the Underlying Indexes is no longer calculated and widely disseminated on at least a 15-second basis during the time the Equity Index-Linked Securities trade on the Exchange; or • If such other event occurs or condition exists which, in the opinion of the Exchange, makes further dealings on the Exchange inadvisable. Commodity-Linked Securities Listing Standards Commodity-Linked Securities will be subject to the criteria in proposed ISE Rule 2130(d) for initial and continued listing. An issue of Commodity-Linked Securities must meet initial listing standards set forth in either the first or second bullet point below: • One or more physical commodities or commodity futures, options or other commodity derivatives, Commodity-Based Trust Shares (as defined in ISE Rule 2125), or a basket or index of any of the foregoing (the “Commodity Reference Asset”) to which the Commodity-Linked Security is linked shall have been reviewed and approved for the trading of Commodity-Based Trust Shares, options, or other derivatives by the Commission under section 19(b)(2) of the Act 15 and rules thereunder, and the conditions set forth in the Commission's approval order, including with respect to comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements, continue to be satisfied; or 15 *Id.* • The pricing information for each component of a Commodity Reference Asset must be derived from a market which is an ISG member or affiliate member or with which the Exchange has a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, pricing information for gold and silver may be derived from the London Bullion Market Association. In addition, the issue must meet both of the following initial listing criteria: • The value of the Commodity Reference Asset must be calculated and widely disseminated on at least a 15-second basis during the time the Commodity-Linked Securities trade on the Exchange; and • In the case of Commodity-Linked Securities that are periodically redeemable, the indicative value of the subject Commodity-Linked Securities must be calculated and widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors on at least a 15-second basis during the time the Commodity-Linked Securities trade on the Exchange. The Exchange will commence delisting or removal proceedings if any of the initial listing criteria described above is not continuously maintained. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an issue of Commodity-Linked Securities will not be delisted for a failure to have in place comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements if the Commodity Reference Asset has at least ten components, and the Exchange has comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements with respect to at least 90% of the dollar weight of the Commodity Reference Asset. The Exchange will also commence delisting or removal proceedings: • If the aggregate market value or the principal amount of the Commodity-Linked Securities publicly held is less than $400,000; • The value of the Commodity Reference Asset is no longer calculated or available and a new Commodity Reference Asset is substituted, unless the new Commodity Reference Asset meets the requirements of proposed ISE Rule 2130; or • If such other event occurs or condition exists which, in the opinion of the Exchange, makes further dealings on the Exchange inadvisable. Currency-Linked Securities Listing Standards Currency-Linked Securities will be subject to the criteria in proposed ISE Rule 2130(e) for initial and continued listing. An issue of Currency-Linked Securities must meet the initial listing standards set forth in either bullet point below: • One or more currencies, options or currency futures or other currency derivatives, Currency Trust Shares (as defined in ISE Rule 2126), or a basket or index of any of the foregoing (the “Currency Reference Asset”) to which the Currency-Linked Security is linked shall have been reviewed and approved for the trading of Currency Trust Shares, options, or other derivatives by the Commission under section 19(b)(2) of the Act 16 and rules thereunder, and the conditions set forth in the Commission's approval order, including with respect to comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements, continue to be satisfied; or 16 *Id.* • The pricing information for each component of a Currency Reference Asset must be

(a)the generally accepted spot price for the currency exchange rate in question or

(y)derived from a market which is an ISG member or affiliate member or with which the Exchange has in place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement and is the pricing source for components of a Currency Reference Asset that has previously been approved by the Commission. In addition, the issue must meet both of the following initial listing criteria: • The value of the Currency Reference Asset must be calculated and widely disseminated on at least a 15-second basis during the time the Currency-Linked Securities trade on the Exchange; and • In the case of Currency-Linked Securities that are periodically redeemable, the indicative value of the subject Currency-Linked Securities must be calculated and widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors on at least a 15-second basis during the time the Currency-Linked Securities trade on the Exchange. The Exchange will commence delisting or removal proceedings if any of the initial listing criteria described above is not continuously maintained. Notwithstanding the forgoing, an issue of Currency-Linked Securities will not be delisted for a failure to have in place comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements if the Currency Reference Asset has at least ten components, and the Exchange has comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements with respect to at least 90% of the dollar weight of the Currency Reference Asset. The Exchange will also commence delisting or removal proceedings under any of the following circumstances: • If the aggregate market value or the principal amount of the Currency-Linked Securities publicly held is less than $400,000; • If the value of the Currency Reference Asset is no longer calculated or available and a new Currency Reference Asset is substituted, unless the new Currency Reference Asset meets the requirements of proposed ISE Rule 2130; or • If such other event occurs or condition exists which, in the opinion of the Exchange, makes further dealings on the Exchange inadvisable. Exchange Rules Applicable to Index-Linked Securities Index-Linked Securities traded on the Exchange will be subject to all Exchange rules governing the trading of equity securities. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend the definition of “Equity Security” to include Index-Linked Securities. 17 The Exchange's equity margin rules and the Exchange's regular trading hours (from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern Time) will apply to transactions in Index-Linked Securities. 17 *See* ISE Rule 2100(c)(7). Regulatory Information Circular Upon evaluating the nature and complexity of each Index-Linked Security, the Exchange represents that it will prepare and distribute, if appropriate, a Regulatory Information Circular to Electronic Access Members (“EAMs”) describing the product. Accordingly, the particular structure of, and the corresponding risks transacting in, an Index-Linked Security will be highlighted and disclosed. In particular, the Regulatory Information Circular will set forth the Exchange's suitability rule that requires EAMs recommending a transaction in Index-Linked Securities

(1)To determine that such transaction is suitable for the customer (ISE Rule 610), and

(2)to have a reasonable basis for believing that the customer can evaluate the special characteristics, and is able to bear the financial risks, of such transaction. In addition, the Regulatory Information Circular will reference the requirement that EAMs must deliver a prospectus to investors purchasing newly issued Index-Linked Securities prior to or concurrently with the confirmation of a transaction. Surveillance The Exchange will closely monitor activity in Index-Linked Securities to identify and deter any potential improper trading activity in such securities. Additionally, the Exchange represents that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of Index-Linked Securities. Specifically, the Exchange will rely on its existing surveillance procedures governing equities, options, and exchange-traded funds. The Exchange has developed procedures to closely monitor activity in Index-Linked Securities and the Underlying Indexes and their components to identify and deter potential improper trading activity. To the extent applicable, the Exchange will be able to obtain trading and beneficial holder information from the primary trading markets for the components of the Underlying Indexes in relation to Index-Linked Securities, either pursuant to bilateral information sharing agreements with those markets or because those markets are full or affiliate members of ISG. Firewall Procedures If the Underlying Index is maintained by a broker-dealer, the broker-dealer shall erect a “firewall” around the personnel responsible for the maintenance of the Underlying Index or who have access to information concerning changes and adjustments to the Underlying Index, and the Underlying Index shall be calculated by a third party who is not a broker-dealer. Any advisory committee, supervisory board, or similar entity that advises an Underlying Index licensor or administrator or that makes decisions regarding the Underlying Index or portfolio composition, methodology, and related matters must implement and maintain, or be subject to, procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material, non-public information regarding the applicable Underlying Index or portfolio. Trading Halts In the case of Commodity- or Currency-Linked Securities, if the indicative value or the Commodity Reference Asset value or Currency Reference Asset value, as the case may be, applicable to a series of securities is not being disseminated as required, or, in the case of Equity Index-Linked Securities, if the value of the Underlying Index is not being disseminated as required, the Exchange may halt trading during the day on which such interruption first occurs. If such interruption persists past the trading day in which it occurred, the Exchange will halt trading no later than the beginning of the trading day following the interruption. With respect to Index-Linked Securities admitted to dealings by the Exchange pursuant to UTP, the Exchange will halt trading in accordance with proposed ISE Rule 2101(a), if such Index-Linked Security is no longer listed or trading on the primary listing market. 2. Statutory Basis The proposal is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act, 18 in general, and section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 19 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 18 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 19 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will 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-ISE-2007-47 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2007-47. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. 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-ISE-2007-47 and should be submitted on or before August 17, 2007. IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of the Proposed Rule Change After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 20 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 21 which requires, among other things, that the Exchange's rules be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 20 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 21 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Generic Listing Standards for Index-Linked Securities To list and/or trade any issue of Index-Linked Securities, the Exchange currently must file a proposed rule change with the Commission pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Act 22 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder. 23 However, Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act 24 provides that the listing and trading of a new derivative securities product by an SRO will not be deemed a proposed rule change pursuant to Rule 19b-4(c)(1) under the Act 25 if the Commission has approved, pursuant to section 19(b) of the Act, the SRO's trading rules, procedures, and listing standards for the product class that would include the new derivative securities product, and the SRO has a surveillance program for the product class. The Exchange's proposed rules for the listing and/or trading of Index-Linked Securities pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) fulfill these requirements. The Exchange's ability to rely on Rule 19b-4(e) to list and/or trade Index-Linked Securities that meet the requirements of proposed ISE Rule 2130 should reduce the timeframe for bringing these securities to the market and thereby reduce the burdens on issuers and other market participants, while also promoting competition and making such securities available to investors more quickly. 22 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 23 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 24 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). 25 17 CFR 240.19b-4(c)(1). The Commission has previously approved generic listing standards that are substantially similar to ISE's proposal. 26 The Commission believes that the proposed generic listing standards for Index-Linked Securities should fulfill the intended objective of Rule 19b-4(e) and allow securities that satisfy the proposed generic listing standards to commence trading without the need for public comment and Commission approval. 27 26 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 55794 (May 22, 2007), 72 FR 29558 (May 29, 2007) (SR-Amex-2007-45) (amending the generic listing standards for Index-Linked Securities and approving generic listing standards for Commodity- and Currency-Linked Securities); and 55687 (May 1, 2007), 72 FR 25824 (May 7, 2007) (SR-NYSE-2007-27) (approving generic listing standards for Equity Index-Linked Securities, Commodity-Linked Securities, and Currency-Linked Securities). 27 The Commission notes that the failure of a particular product or index to comply with the proposed generic listing standards under Rule 19b-4(e), however, would not preclude the Exchange from submitting a separate filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(2), requesting Commission approval to list and trade a particular equity-, commodity-, or currency-linked product. The Commission further notes that securities that satisfy ISE's proposed generic listing standards for Index-Linked Securities would only be traded on the Exchange pursuant to UTP, pursuant to proposed ISE Rule 2101(a), and that the Exchange would be required to submit a separate filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) requesting Commission approval if the Exchange seeks to trade such securities by listing them. *See* ISE Rule 2101(a). Listing and Trading Index-Linked Securities Taken together, the Commission finds that ISE's proposal contains adequate rules and procedures to govern the listing and trading of Index-Linked Securities pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) on the Exchange. All such securities listed and/or traded under their respective generic standards will be subject to the full panoply of ISE rules and procedures that currently govern the trading of equity securities on the Exchange. As set forth more fully above, ISE has proposed size, earnings, and minimum tangible net worth requirements for each issuer, as well as minimum public distribution and shareholder, principal amount/aggregate market value, and minimum term thresholds for each issuance of Index-Linked Securities. 28 In addition, the Exchange's proposal requires that the assets (or their derivatives) underlying such securities must either have

(1)Been reviewed and approved for trading by the Commission, or

(2)in the case of Equity Index-Linked Securities, such underlying assets or their derivatives have sufficient market value and trading volume and not constitute an unreasonable percentage of the overall dollar weight of the Underlying Index, or, in the case of Commodity- and Currency-Linked Securities, their pricing information be reliable or derived from certain required sources. These requirements are designed to ensure that the trading markets for the underlying components are adequately capitalized and sufficiently liquid. The Commission believes that these requirements should minimize the potential for manipulation. 28 The Commission notes that ISE's proposed initial requirements for all issuers and issuances of Index-Linked Securities are substantially similar to those adopted by other exchanges. *See supra* note 26. The Commission also finds that

(1)In the case of Equity Index-Linked Securities, the requirement that all component securities must either be securities issued by a reporting company under the Act that is listed on a national securities exchange and be an NMS stock (as defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS) 29 or be foreign country securities or ADRs, so long as such foreign country securities or foreign country securities underlying the ADRs that are primarily traded on foreign markets, which are not ISG members or parties to comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements, do not in the aggregate represent more than 20% of the dollar weight of the Underlying Index, and

(2)in the case of Commodity-Linked and Currency-Linked Securities with at least ten components, the requirement that at least 90% of the dollar weight of the corresponding Commodity Reference Asset or Currency Reference Asset, as the case may be, must have comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements with the Exchange, in each case, should aid the Exchange in identifying potential trading and other violations of its rules. The Commission believes that such a requirement will contribute to the transparency of the applicable Underlying Index. The Commission also notes that, by requiring pricing information for the relevant components to be readily available, the proposed listing standards of ISE Rule 2130 should help ensure a fair and orderly market for Index-Linked Securities listed and/or traded pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e). 29 *See* 17 CFR 242.600(b)(47). The Exchange has also developed delisting criteria that will permit it to suspend trading of Index-Linked Securities in circumstances that make further dealings in such products inadvisable. The Commission believes that the delisting criteria should help ensure that a minimum level of liquidity exists for each such security to allow for the maintenance of fair and orderly markets. Also, in the event that the value of the Underlying Index for Index-Linked Securities (or, for Commodity-Linked and Currency-Linked Securities that are periodically redeemable, the corresponding indicative value) is no longer calculated and widely disseminated on at least a 15-second basis, the Exchange may halt trading during the day on which the interruption first occurs; however, if the interruption persists past the trading day on which it occurred, the Exchange will halt trading no later than the beginning of the trading day following the interruption and will commence delisting proceedings. The Commission also notes that, because Index-Linked Securities would only be traded on the Exchange pursuant to UTP under proposed ISE Rule 2101(a), the Exchange would halt the trading of such securities if such Index-Linked Securities are no longer listed or trading on the original listing market. Surveillance The Commission notes that any Index-Linked Securities approved for listing and/or trading would be subject to the Exchange's existing surveillance procedures governing equities, options, and exchange-traded funds, as well as procedures the Exchange represents it has developed to closely monitor activity in such securities and the Underlying Indexes and/or portfolios. The Exchange also has represented that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of Index-Linked Securities listed pursuant to the proposed generic listing standards and that it will be able to obtain necessary trading and beneficial holder information from the primary trading markets for the underlying components, either pursuant to bilateral information sharing agreements with those markets or because those markets are full or affiliate members of ISG. Regulatory Information Circular The Exchange has represented that it will distribute, as appropriate, a Regulatory Information Circular to EAMs describing the product, the specific structure of the product, and the corresponding risks of transacting in Index-Linked Securities. In addition, the Regulatory Information Circular will set forth the Exchange's suitability requirements with respect to recommendations in transactions in Index-Linked Securities to customers and the prospectus delivery requirements. Firewall Procedures The Exchange has further represented that if the Underlying Index is maintained by a broker-dealer, such broker-dealer will establish a “firewall” around personnel responsible for the maintenance of such Underlying Index or who have access to information concerning changes and adjustments to the Underlying Index. As an added measure, a third-party who is not a broker-dealer will be required to calculate the value of the Underlying Index. In addition, the Exchange has stated that any advisory committee, supervisory board, or similar entity that advises an Underlying Index licensor or administrator or that makes decisions regarding the Underlying Index or portfolio composition, methodology, and related matters must implement and maintain, or be subject to, procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material, non-public information regarding the applicable Underlying Index or portfolio. Acceleration The Commission finds good cause for approving the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1 thereto, before the 30th day after the date of publication of notice of filing thereof in the **Federal Register** . The Exchange requested accelerated approval of the proposal to facilitate the prompt trading of Index-Linked Securities pursuant to UTP based on the specified criteria of proposed ISE Rules 2100, 2101, and 2130. The Commission notes that the Exchange's proposed generic listing standards for Index-Linked Securities are substantially based on previously approved listing standards for such securities 30 and presently is not aware of any regulatory issue that should cause it to revisit that finding or would preclude the trading of such securities on the Exchange. Therefore, accelerating approval of this proposal should benefit investors by creating, without undue delay, additional competition in the market for Index-Linked Securities, subject to the standards and representations discussed herein. Therefore, the Commission finds good cause, consistent with section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 31 to approve the proposed rule change on an accelerated basis. 30 *See supra* note 26. 31 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 32 that the proposed rule change (SR-ISE-2007-47), as modified by Amendment No. 1 thereto, be, and it hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis. 32 *Id.* For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 33 33 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-14502 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56108; File No. SR-NASD-2007-045] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Extending the Portfolio Margin Pilot Program July 19, 2007. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act” or “Exchange Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on July 2, 2007, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by NASD. NASD has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change NASD proposes to extend through July 31, 2008 the portfolio margin pilot program set forth in Rule 2520(g). The portfolio margin pilot program permits members to margin certain products according to a prescribed portfolio margin methodology and is set to expire on July 31, 2007. There is no change to the rule text with this proposed rule change. The text of the proposed rule change is available at NASD, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.nasd.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, NASD included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change, and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. NASD has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose On February 12, 2007, NASD filed SR-NASD-2007-013 for immediate effectiveness to establish a portfolio margin pilot program that permits member firms to elect to margin certain products according to a prescribed portfolio margin methodology. 5 The portfolio margin pilot program is substantially similar to margin rule amendments by the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) and the Chicago Board Options Exchange (“CBOE”), which were approved by the Commission. 6 Consistent with the amended NYSE and CBOE portfolio margin programs, NASD's pilot, as proposed in SR-NASD-2007-013, started on April 2, 2007 and ends on July 31, 2007. 5 *See* Exchange Act Release No. 55471 (March 14, 2007), 72 FR 13149 (March 20, 2007) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of SR-NASD-2007-013). 6 *See* Exchange Act Release No. 54918 (December 12, 2006), 71 FR 75790 (December 18, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2006-13, relating to further amendments to the NYSE's portfolio margin pilot program); Exchange Act Release No. 54125 (July 11, 2006), 71 FR 40766 (July 18, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2005-93, relating to amendments to the NYSE's portfolio margin pilot program); Exchange Act Release No. 52031 (July 14, 2005) 70 FR 42130 (July 21, 2005) (SR-NYSE-2002-19, relating to the NYSE's original portfolio margin pilot). *See also* Exchange Act Release No. 54919 (December 12, 2006), 71 FR 75781 (December 18, 2006) (SR-CBOE-2006-014, relating to amendments to the CBOE's portfolio margin pilot); Exchange Act Release No. 52032 (July 14, 2005) 70 FR 42118 (July 21, 2005) (SR-CBOE-2002-03, relating to the CBOE's original portfolio margin pilot). NASD proposes to extend the operation of the pilot for an additional one-year period to July 31, 2008. NASD believes that extending the pilot for twelve months is warranted in that time is needed to assess the operation and utility of the program, especially in light of the fact that the rules establishing the pilot, effective April 2, 2007, made equities, equity options, narrow-based index options, unlisted derivatives and security futures eligible for portfolio margining. An extension will enable NASD to determine whether the program better aligns margin requirements with the actual risk of hedged products, thereby potentially alleviating excess margin calls and potentially reducing the risk of forced liquidations of positions in customer accounts. For these reasons, NASD requests that the Commission extend the pilot program until July 31, 2008. NASD has filed the proposed rule change for immediate effectiveness. 7 7 The operative date of the proposed rule change will be August 1, 2007. 2. Statutory Basis NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, 8 which requires, among other things, that NASD rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. NASD believes that a one-year extension will enable NASD to evaluate the operation and utility of the portfolio margin pilot program to determine whether the program better aligns the margin requirements with actual risk. 8 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(6). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change does not:

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

(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 9 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 10 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-NASD-2007-045 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2007-045. 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, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of NASD. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2007-045 and should be submitted on or before August 17, 2007. 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. E7-14504 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56113; File No. SR-NSX-2007-05] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change to Modify Chapter VII of the Exchange's Rules Regarding Suspensions of an ETP Holder by Certain Exchange Officers July 20, 2007. I. Introduction On May 9, 2007, the National Stock Exchange, Inc. (“NSX” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed rule change, pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder 2 to modify Chapter VII of the Exchange's rules to provide that the Chairman of the Exchange's Board of Directors (“Chairman”) or the Exchange's Chief Regulatory Officer, or their respective designees, would have the authority to summarily suspend or place limitations or conditions on an ETP Holder or summarily suspend a person from access to Exchange services in certain circumstances. Notice of the proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on June 18, 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. 55893 (June 11, 2007), 72 FR 33551. II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change NSX Rule 7.1 currently authorizes the Chairman of the NSX Board of Directors (“Chairman”) or NSX's President (“President”) to summarily suspend an ETP Holder, or impose such conditions and restrictions upon an ETP Holder as are reasonably necessary for the protection of investors, the Exchange, the creditors, and the customers of such ETP Holder, if such ETP Holder, among other things, has failed to perform its contracts, is insolvent, or is in such financial or operational condition or operating its business in such a manner that it cannot be permitted to continue in business with safety to its customers, creditors, and other ETP Holders of the Exchange. 4 The Chairman or President may also lift such a suspension without further proceedings, if appropriate. 5 NSX Rule 7.6 currently permits the Chairman or President to, under certain circumstances, summary limit or prohibit, persons from access to services offered by the Exchange. 4 *See* NSX Rule 7.1(a). 5 *See* NSX Rule 7.1(c). NSX proposes to amend Rules 7.1 and 7.6 to authorize the Chairman or NSX's Chief Regulatory Officer (“CRO”), or their respective designees, to impose and lift suspensions as described above. NSX's President would no longer have such authority. The Exchange represents that the designee for the Chairman would be the Chairman of the Exchange's Regulatory Oversight Committee (“ROC”), a member of the ROC, or another independent member of the Exchange's Board of Directors, 6 in that order of priority. The designee for the CRO would be an officer in the Exchange's Regulatory Services Division. The proposal does not otherwise modify NSX's rules regarding suspension, including its provisions for review of summary actions. 6 NSX By-Law Section 1.1(I)(1) defines “Independent Director” as a member of the Board that the Board has determined to have no material relationship with the Exchange or any affiliate of the Exchange, or any ETP Holder or any affiliate of any ETP Holder, other than as a member of the Board. III. Discussion and Commission Findings The Commission has reviewed the proposed rule change and finds that it is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 7 Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(1) 8 of the Act, which requires the Exchange to be so organized and have the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the Act and to comply, and to enforce compliance by its members, with the Act and the rules of the Exchange. In addition, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 9 which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 7 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The Commission believes that the reallocation of authority under NSX Rules 7.1 and 7.6 from the Chairman and President to the Chairman and CRO, or their respective designees, is consistent with the Act. The Commission also believes that the reallocation is designed to provide for continuity in the event that the Chairman or CRO is unavailable. The Commission notes that the Exchange's rules governing the review of suspensions remain unchanged. IV. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 10 that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NSX-2007-05) be, and hereby is, approved. 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-14506 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56107; File No. SR-NYSE-2007-56] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Extending the Portfolio Margin Pilot Program Under NYSE Rules 431 (Margin Requirements) and 726 (Delivery of Options Disclosure Document and Prospectus) July 19, 2007. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on June 28, 2007, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or the “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The NYSE is filing with the Commission rules previously approved in order to secure a one-year extension of the pilot program (from August 1, 2007 until July 31, 2008) reflected in the changes embodied in SR-NYSE-2006-13, which was approved by the Commission on December 12, 2006 on a pilot basis, to expire on July 31, 2007. 5 The previously approved changes to NYSE Rule 431 (“Margin Requirements”) expanded the scope of products that are eligible for treatment as part of the original Commission-approved portfolio margin pilot program 6 and expanded pilot; 7 eliminated the $5 million equity requirement, except for accounts that carry unlisted derivatives; and eliminated the use of a cross-margin account for margining eligible securities products with eligible commodity products. The approved pilot rules also deleted the “Sample Portfolio Margining and Cross Margining Risk Disclosure Statement to Satisfy Requirements of Exchange Rule 431(g),” previously found in NYSE Rule 726 (“Delivery of Options Disclosure Document and Prospectus”). 8 5 *See* Exchange Act Release No. 54918 (December 12, 2006), 71 FR 75790 (December 18, 2006) [SR-NYSE-2006-13]. 6 *See* Exchange Act Release No. 52031 (July 14, 2005), 70 FR 42130 (July 21, 2005) [SR-NYSE-2002-19]; *see also* NYSE Information Memo 05-56, dated August 18, 2005, for additional information. 7 *See* Exchange Act Release No. 54125 (July 11, 2006), 71 FR 40766 (July 18, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2005-93); *see also* NYSE Information Memo 06-57, dated August 2, 2006, for additional information. 8 *See supra* note 5. There is no change to the rule text with this proposed rule change. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the NYSE's Web site ( *http://www.nyse.com* ), at the principal office of the NYSE, 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. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange is proposing to extend for one year the portfolio margin pilot program, 9 which has been expanded to make the following products eligible for treatment under portfolio margin requirements: all margin equity securities, 10 listed options, unlisted derivatives, and security futures products, provided certain requirements are met. The Exchange believes that the benefits which these regulations deliver, together with the widespread industry acceptance of the changes, supports a one year extension of the pilot program. Such an extension will give the Exchange an opportunity to better gauge the impact of the changes to the credit profile of its member organizations and to determine whether changes to the pilot are needed. The Exchange will also seek to determine whether fixed income securities should be added to the list of eligible products. 9 *See supra* note 5. 10 The term “margin equity security” utilizes the definition at Section 220.2 of Regulation T of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, excluding a non-equity security. The proposed rule change will facilitate the continuing evaluation of the portfolio margin pilot. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is non-controversial, given the extensive prior publication of the portfolio margining rules, their previous approval in pilot status, the lack of problematic public comment on prior filings, and the lack of comment on the December 2006 approval of the pilot program. 11 11 *See supra* note 5. a. The Original Pilot On July 14, 2005, the Commission approved the original portfolio margin rules that amended Exchange Rules 431 and 726 to permit, on a two-year pilot basis, the use of a prescribed risk-based methodology 12 for listed, broad-based U.S. index options and index warrants, along with any underlying instruments, as an alternative to the strategy or position based margin requirements, 13 currently required in Rule 431(a) through (f). 12 *See supra* note 6. 13 Prior to the portfolio margin pilot, member organizations were solely subject, pursuant to NYSE Rule 431, to strategy or positioned-based margin requirements. This methodology applied specific margin percentage requirements as prescribed in Rule 431 to each security position and/or strategy, either long or short, held in a customer's account, irrespective of the fact that all security ( *e.g.* , options) prices do not change equally (in percentage terms) with a change in the price of the underlying security. When utilizing a portfolio margin methodology, offsets are fully realized, whereas under strategy or position-based methodology, positions and/or groups of positions comprising a single strategy are margined independently of each other and offsets between them do not efficiently impact the total margin requirement. b. Portfolio Margin Requirements Portfolio margining is a margin methodology that sets margin requirements for an account based on the greatest projected net loss of all positions in a product class or group. The pilot utilizes a Commission-approved theoretical options pricing model. 14 These scenarios are designed to measure the theoretical loss of the positions given changes in both the underlying price and implied volatility inputs to the model. Accordingly, the margin required is based on the greatest loss that would be incurred in a portfolio if the value of its components move up or down by a predetermined amount. Member organizations are no longer required to compute a margin requirement for each individual position or strategy for eligible positions in a customer's portfolio margin account. 15 14 The theoretical options pricing model is used to derive position values at each valuation point for the purpose of determining the gain or loss. For purposes of the portfolio margin pilot, the amount of initial and maintenance margin required with respect to a portfolio is the larger of:

(1)The greatest loss amount among the valuation calculations; or

(2)the sum of $.375 for each option and security future in the portfolio multiplied by the contract's ( *e.g.* 100 shares per contract) or instrument's multiplier. 15 *See* NYSE Rule 431. Utilizing portfolio margin enables the portfolio to be subjected to certain preset market volatility parameters that reflect historical moves in the underlying security thereby assessing potential loss in the portfolio in the aggregate. Accordingly, such a methodology provides a more risk based calculation of margin requirements. As a pre-condition to permitting portfolio margining, member organizations are required to establish comprehensive procedures and controls to monitor credit risk to the member organization's capital, including intra-day credit risk and stress testing of portfolio margin accounts. Further, member organizations must establish procedures for regular review and testing of these required risk analysis procedures and controls. 16 16 *See* NYSE Rule 431(g). c. Expanded Pilot On December 29, 2005, the Exchange filed with the Commission a proposed rule change to Rule 431 to expand the approved products for certain customers eligible for treatment under portfolio margin requirements to include security futures and single stock options. 17 Collectively, these approved pilot rules are referred to as the “Expanded Pilot.” 18 The Expanded Pilot was noticed for comment in the **Federal Register** on January 23, 2006. 19 The comment period that ended February 13, 2006, resulted in three comment letters received, dated February 13, 2006, from the Securities Industry Association, Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and the Futures Industry Association. 17 The Exchange and CBOE received letters in late September 2005 from SEC Chairman Cox asking the SROs to consider expanding portfolio margining to a broader universe of products. The SEC encouraged the Exchanges to file a rule proposal before year-end 2005. 18 The discussion under the “Expanded Pilot” section includes the portfolio margin rules, as expanded to include security futures and single stock options only. This discussion does not include the portfolio margin rules as approved by the Commission in December 2006. *See* Sections I and II.A.1. for a discussion of the portfolio margin rules as approved in December 2006; *see also supra* note 5. 19 *See* Exchange Act Release No. 53126 (January 13, 2006) 71 FR 3586 (January 23, 2006) [SR-NYSE-2005-93]. On June 2, 2006 the Exchange filed with the Commission a response to the comment letters. In its response to comments, the Exchange noted that many of the comments included in these three letters were addressed in a subsequent rule filing, SR-NYSE-2006-13 20 that was made by the Exchange with the Commission on March 1, 2006. Specifically, in SR-NYSE-2006-13, the Exchange proposed the elimination of the cross-margin account and the expansion of the types of eligible products that could be included in a portfolio margining account. 21 20 *See* Exchange Act Release No. 53577 (March 30, 2006) 71 FR 17539 (April 6, 2006) [SR-NYSE-2006-13]. 21 *See supra* note 5. On July 11, 2006, the Commission approved the Expanded Pilot 22 to include listed security futures and listed single stock options as eligible products for customer portfolio margining. 22 *See supra* notes 7 and 18. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the section 6(b) of the Act, 23 in general, and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(5) 24 of the Act, in particular, because it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. A one-year extension of the portfolio margin pilot program is consistent with this section in that it will enable the Exchange to better judge the operation and benefit of the rules, which in turn are expected to better align margin requirements with the actual risk of hedged products, potentially alleviate excess margin calls and potentially reduce the risk of forced liquidations of positions in customer accounts. In addition, it will allow the Exchange to study the impact of these changes to the credit profile of its member organizations. 23 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 24 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change does not:

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

(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 25 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 26 25 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 26 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2007-56 on the subject line. Paper Comment • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-56. 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, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of NYSE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-56 and should be submitted on or before August 17, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 27 27 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-14503 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [License No. 09/79-0454] Emergence Capital Partners SBIC, L.P.; Notice Seeking Exemption Under Section 312 of the Small Business Investment Act, Conflicts of Interest Notice is hereby given that Emergence Capital Partners SBIC, L.P., 160 Bovet Road, Suite 300, San Mateo, CA 94402, a Federal Licensee under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended (“the Act”), in connection with the financing of a small concern, has sought an exemption under Section 312 of the Act and Section 107.730, Financings which Constitute Conflicts of Interest of the Small Business Administration (“SBA”) Rules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.730). Emergence Capital Partners SBIC, L.P. proposes to provide equity/debt security financing to Intacct Corporation (“Intacct”), 125 S. Market Street, Suite 600, San Jose, CA 95113. The financing is contemplated to fund the ongoing operating needs of the business. The financing is brought within the purview of § 107.730(a)(1) of the Regulations because Emergence Capital Partners, L.P. and Emergence Capital Associates, L.P., all Associates of Emergence Capital Partners SBIC, L.P., own more than ten percent of Intacct, and therefore Intacct is considered an Associate of Emergence Capital Partners SBIC, L.P. as detailed in § 107.50 of the Regulations. Notice is hereby given that any interested person may submit written comments on the transaction to the Associate Administrator for Investment, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416. Dated: July 6, 2007. Harry Haskins, Acting Associate Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-14592 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #10866 and #10867] Kansas Disaster Number KS-00018 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 10. 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 06/01/2007. *Effective Date:* 07/18/2007. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 08/06/2007. *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 05/06/2007 is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Mcpherson, Pottawatomie, Smith. *Contiguous Counties:* Kansas, Nemaha, Nebraska, Webster. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008). Herbert L. Mitchell, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-14515 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #10923 and #10924] Kansas Disaster Number KS-00022 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 2. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Kansas (FEMA-1711-DR), dated 07/05/2007. *Incident:* Severe Storms and Flooding. *Incident Period:* 06/26/2007 and continuing. *Effective Date:* 07/18/2007. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 09/04/2007. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/07/2008. 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 07/05/2007 is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Anderson, Bourbon, Butler, Chautauqua, Cherokee, Coffey, Crawford, Franklin, Greenwood, Osage, Woodson. *Contiguous Counties:* Kansas: Chase, Harvey, Lyon, Marion, Shawnee, Wabaunsee. Missouri: Barton, Jasper, Newton. Oklahoma: Ottawa. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008). Herbert L. Mitchell, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-14517 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration # 10946 and # 10947] Massachusetts Disaster # MA-00011 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts dated 07/23/2007. *Incident:* Bernat Mill Complex Fire. *Incident Period:* 07/21/2007. *Effective Date:* 07/23/2007. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 09/21/2007. *Economic Injury

(EIDL)Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/23/2008. 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: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: Primary Counties: Worcester Contiguous Counties: Massachusetts: Franklin, Hampden, Hampshire, Middlesex, Norfolk. Connecticut: Tolland, Windham. New Hampshire: Cheshire, Hillsborough. Rhode Island: Providence. The Interest Rates are: Percent Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere 5.750 Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.875 Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere 8.000 Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere 4.000 Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere 5.250 Businesses And Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere 4.000 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 10946 5 and for economic injury is 10947 0. The States which received an EIDL Declaration # are Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Rhode Island. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Dated: July 23, 2007. Steven C. Preston, Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-14590 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #10925] New York Disaster Number NY-00046 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 1. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of New York (FEMA-1710-DR), dated 07/02/2007. *Incident:* Severe Storms and Flooding. *Incident Period:* 06/19/2007. *Effective Date:* 07/13/2007. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 08/31/2007. 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 President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of New York, dated 07/02/2007, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster. Primary Counties: Ulster. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) Herbert L. Mitchell, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-14518 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration # 10944 and # 10945] Vermont Disaster # VT-00004 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of Vermont dated 07/23/2007. *Incident:* Severe Storms and Flooding. *Incident Period:* 07/09/2007 through 07/11/2007. *Effective Date:* 07/23/2007. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 09/21/2007. *Economic Injury

(EIDL)Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/23/2008. 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: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: Primary Counties: Washington. Contiguous Counties: Vermont, Addison, Caledonia, Chittenden, Lamoille, Orange. The Interest Rates are: Percent Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere: 5.750 Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere: 2.875 Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere: 8.000 Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere: 4.000 Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere: 5.250 Businesses And Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere: 4.000 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 10944 B and for economic injury is 10945 0. The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is Vermont. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008). Dated: July 23, 2007. Steven C. Preston, Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-14591 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE Federal Register Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment and To Conduct Scoping Meetings and Notice of Floodplain and Wetland Involvement; Enbridge Energy, Limited Partnership (Alberta Clipper Project) AGENCY: Department of State. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Assessment

(EA)and to conduct public scoping meetings. Notice of floodplain and wetlands involvement. SUMMARY: Enbridge Energy, Limited Partnership (Enbridge) has applied to the United States Department of State for a Presidential Permit for the proposed construction, connection, operation, and maintenance at the border of the United States of facilities for the export and import of petroleum to and from a foreign country (Alberta Clipper Project). The Department of State receives and considers applications for Presidential Permits for such energy-related pipelines pursuant to authority delegated to it by the President under Executive Order 13337 of April 30, 2004 (69 FR 25299). To issue a Permit, the Department of State must find that issuance would serve the national interest. The Department intends to consult extensively with concerned Federal and State agencies on this application, and invites public comment to assist it in arriving at its determination. In accordance with Section 102(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4332(C)) and implementing regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508) and the Department of State (22 CFR part 161), including in particular 22 CFR 161.7(c)(1), the Department of State intends to prepare an environmental assessment

(EA)to determine if there are any potential significant impacts and to address alternatives to the proposed action. The purpose of this Notice of Intent is to inform the public about the proposed action, announce plans for scoping meetings, invite public participation in the scoping process, and solicit public comments for consideration in establishing the scope and content of the Alberta Clipper Project EA. As the proposed project may involve an action in a floodplain or wetland, the EA will also include a floodplain and wetlands assessment and floodplain statement of findings. In addition, Enbridge proposes to construct an additional pipeline concurrently and within a portion of the same pipeline corridor adjacent to the Alberta Clipper Project between Clearbrook, MN and Superior, WI. This project is not subject to a Presidential Permit or other Department of State jurisdiction. However, because the two projects will be constructed in the same corridor, the Department of State will accept comments on potential issues relevant to the construction of this facility. DATES: Department of State invites interested agencies, organizations, and members of the public to submit comments or suggestions to assist in identifying significant environmental issues and in determining the appropriate scope of the Alberta Clipper Project EA. The public scoping period starts with the publication of this Notice in the **Federal Register** and will continue until September 10, 2007. Written, electronic and oral comments will be given equal weight and the State will consider all comments received or postmarked by September 10, 2007 in defining the scope of the Alberta Clipper Project EA. Comments received or postmarked after that date will be considered to the extent practicable. During this public scoping period, the Department of State plans to use the scoping process in conjunction with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission public hearing process to help identify consulting parties and historic preservation issues for consideration under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and its implementing regulations (36 CFR part 800). Dates and locations for the public scoping meetings are: 1. August 13; 11 a.m.-2 p.m.; Kennedy; MN; VFW & Cafe; 103 5th St. E. 2. August 13; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; Stephen; MN; Stephen Community Center; 319 5th Street. 3. August 14; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; Thief River Falls; MN; Best Western Meeting Room; 1060 Highway 32 South. 4. August 15; 11 a.m.-2 p.m.; Oklee; MN; Oklee Community Hall; 2nd Ave. between fire hall and gas station. 5. August 15; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; Gully; MN; Gully Community Center; 120 S. Main St. 6. August 16; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; Clearbrook; MN; City Hall Gym; 200 Elm St. SE. 7. August 20; 11 a.m.-2 p.m.; Bemidji; MN; Holiday Inn Express Conference Center; 2422 Ridgeway Ave. 8. August 20; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; Bemidji; MN; Holiday Inn Express Conference Center; 2422 Ridgeway Ave. 9. August 21; 11 a.m.-2 p.m.; Cass Lake; MN; Palace Casino and Hotel; 16599 69th Ave. NW. 10. August 21; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; Cohasset; MN; Cohasset Community Center; 305 NW 1st Ave. 11. August 22; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; Floodwood; MN; St. Louis County Fair Building; 107 W. 7th Ave. 12. August 23; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; Carlton; MN; Black Bear Hotel; 1789 Highway 210; Lake Hall Room. The public is encouraged to become involved in this process and provide specific comments or concerns about the proposed project. By becoming a commentator, your concerns will be addressed in the Alberta Clipper Project EA and considered by the Department of State. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental impacts, reasonable alternatives (including alternative facility sites and alternative pipeline routes), and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. The public scoping meetings identified above are designed to provide another opportunity to offer comments on the proposed project. Interested individuals and groups are encouraged to attend these meetings and to present comments on the environmental issues they believe should be addressed in the Alberta Clipper EA. Again, written comments are considered with equal weight in the process relative to those received in public scoping meetings. ADDRESSES: Written comments or suggestions on the Alberta Clipper EA and scope of environmental review should be addressed to: Elizabeth Orlando, OES/ENV Room 2657, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC 20520. Comments may be submitted electronically to: *albertaclipper@state.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the proposed projects or to receive a copy of the Draft Alberta Clipper EA when it is issued, contact Elizabeth Orlando at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice by electronic or regular mail as listed above, or by telephone

(202)647-4284, or by fax at

(202)647-5947. More information on the Enbridge Alberta Clipper Project application for a Presidential Permit, including associated maps and drawings will be downloadable in its entirety from an Enbridge hosted project Web site that is being established for this purpose and will be accessible from: *http://www.enbridgeUS.com/publicinfo.* This Web site is expected to be operational on or about August 13, 2007. This Web site will NOT accept public comments for the record, but it will provide a link to the Department of State project e-mail address noted above. Department of State Presidential Permit information and process can be found at *http://www.state.gov/e/eeb/c9986.htm.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background and Need for Agency Action The Department of State has received an application from Enbridge Energy, Limited Partnership (“Enbridge”) for a Presidential Permit, pursuant to Executive Order 13337 of April 30, 2004, to construct, connect, operate, and maintain a 36-inch crude oil and liquid hydrocarbon pipeline at the U.S.- Canadian border at Neche, Pembina County, North Dakota, for the purpose of transporting liquid hydrocarbons and other petroleum products between the United States and Canada. Enbridge seeks this authorization in connection with its Alberta Clipper Project (“Alberta Clipper Project”), which is designed to transport Canadian crude oil from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin (“WCSB”) to existing refinery markets in the Midwest region of the United States. The project description set forth in this notice is based on information provided by Enbridge in its Presidential permit application. Enbridge is planning to increase its ability to provide additional supplies of petroleum to markets in the United States in response to customer requests and marketplace demands. To fulfill this goal, Enbridge has embarked upon an expansion program to increase its transportation capacity. The Enbridge Expansion Program is specifically designed to increase petroleum transportation services from the increasingly accessible oil sands supply in the WCSB to refineries in the Midwest. Enbridge proposes to construct and operate a petroleum pipeline and related facilities from Hardisty, Alberta, Canada, to Superior, Wisconsin in the United States. The Alberta Clipper Project would have an initial capacity to deliver 450,000 barrels per day

(bpd)of petroleum from an existing terminal at Hardisty, Alberta to an existing terminal in Superior, Wisconsin. In total, the Alberta Clipper Project would consist of approximately 992 miles of new pipeline in total. The proposed system expansion would include the construction of approximately 326 miles of new 36-inch-diameter pipeline from the United States-Canada border near Neche, North Dakota to the existing Enbridge tank farm in Superior, Wisconsin for the transportation of petroleum. Enbridge proposes to construct the pipeline generally along its existing pipeline right-of-way. In Canada, the project would involve the construction of approximately 666 miles of new pipeline from Hardisty, Alberta to the United States-Canada border. Appropriate regulatory authorities in Canada will conduct an independent environmental review for the Canadian facilities. The Alberta Clipper Project also would require modifications at existing pump stations and the construction of delivery facilities and mainline valves. Modifications of the pump stations would occur at locations necessary to maintain adequate flow through the pipeline. Mainline valves would be installed and located as dictated by the hydraulic characteristics of the transported petroleum. Enbridge proposes to begin construction of the project in November 2008. Construction would occur over approximately 14 months, with an in-service date on or before December 31, 2009. U.S. counties that could possibly be affected by construction of the proposed pipeline are: *North Dakota:* Pembina. *Minnesota:* Kittson, Marshall, Pennington, Red Lake, Polk, Clearwater, Beltrami, Hubbard, Cass, Itasca, Aitkin, St. Louis, Carlton. *Wisconsin:* Douglas. The Alberta Clipper Project would be constructed within or adjacent to Enbridge's existing right-of-way between the United States-Canadian border near Neche, North Dakota and Superior, Wisconsin. Construction of the proposed pipeline would generally require a 140-foot-wide construction right-of-way to allow temporary storage of topsoil and spoil and to accommodate safe operation of construction equipment. The spoil side (i.e., topsoil and ditch spoil stockpile area) would typically be up to 50-feet feet wide and generally located within the existing maintained right-of-way. The working side (i.e., equipment work area and travel lane) would typically be 90-feet wide and mostly be located outside the existing maintained right-of-way. Following construction, Enbridge would retain right-of-way to maintain 75-feet from the current outermost pipeline. Dated: July 23, 2007. David Brown, Director, Office of International Oceans, Environment and Scientific Affairs, U.S. Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-14486 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-07-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE Federal Register Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment and To Conduct Scoping Meetings and Notice of Floodplain and Wetland Involvement; Enbridge Pipelines (Southern Lights) L.L.C. (LSr Project) AGENCY: Department of State. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental assessment

(EA)and to conduct public scoping meetings. Notice of floodplain and wetlands involvement. SUMMARY: Enbridge Pipelines (Southern Lights) L.L.C. has applied to the United States Department of State for a Presidential Permit for the proposed construction, connection, operation, and maintenance at the border of the United States of facilities for the export and import of petroleum to and from a foreign country (LSr Project). The Department of State receives and considers applications for Presidential Permits for such energy-related pipelines pursuant to authority delegated to it by the President under Executive Order 13337 of April 30, 2004 (69 FR 25299). To issue a Permit, the Department of State must find that issuance would serve the national interest. The Department intends to consult extensively with concerned Federal and State agencies on this application, and invites public comment to assist it in arriving at its determination. In accordance with Section 102(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4332(C)) and implementing regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508) and the Department of State (22 CFR part 161), including in particular 22 CFR 161.7(c)(1), the Department of State intends to prepare an environmental assessment

(EA)to determine if there are any potential significant impacts and to address alternatives to the proposed action. The purpose of this Notice of Intent is to inform the public about the proposed action, announce plans for scoping meetings, invite public participation in the scoping process, and solicit public comments for consideration in establishing the scope and content of the LSr Project EA. As the proposed project may involve an action in a floodplain or wetland, the EA will also include a floodplain and wetlands assessment and floodplain statement of findings. DATES: Department of State invites interested agencies, organizations, and members of the public to submit comments or suggestions to assist in identifying significant environmental issues and in determining the appropriate scope of the LSr Project EA. The public scoping period starts with the publication of this Notice in the **Federal Register** and will continue until September 10, 2007. Written, electronic and oral comments will be given equal weight and State will consider all comments received or postmarked by September 10, 2007 in defining the scope of the LSr Project EA. Comments received or postmarked after that date will be considered to the extent practicable. During this public scoping period, the Department of State plans to use the scoping process in conjunction with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission public hearing process to help identify consulting parties and historic preservation issues for consideration under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and its implementing regulations (36 CFR part 800). Dates and locations for the public scoping meetings are: 1. August 13; 11 a.m.-2 p.m.; Kennedy; MN; VFW & Cafe; 103 5th St. E. 2. August 13; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; Stephen; MN; Stephen Community Center; 319 5th Street. 3. August 14; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; Thief River Falls; MN; Best Western Meeting Room; 1060 Highway 32 South. 4. August 15; 11 a.m.-2 p.m.; Oklee; MN; Oklee Community Hall; 2nd Ave. Between Fire Hall and Gas Station. 5. August 15; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; Gully; MN; Gully Community Center; 120 S. Main St. 6. August 16; 6 p.m.-9 p.m.; Clearbrook; MN; City Hall Gym; 200 Elm St. SE. The public is encouraged to become involved in this process and provide specific comments or concerns about the proposed project. By becoming a commentator, your concerns will be addressed in the LSr Project EA and considered by the Department of State. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental impacts, reasonable alternatives (including alternative facility sites and alternative pipeline routes), and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. The public scoping meetings identified above are designed to provide another opportunity to offer comments on the proposed project. Interested individuals and groups are encouraged to attend these meetings and to present comments on the environmental issues they believe should be addressed in the LSr EA. Again, written comments are considered with equal weight in the process relative to those received in public scoping meetings. ADDRESSES: Written comments or suggestions on the scope of the LSr EA should be addressed to: Elizabeth Orlando, OES/ENV Room 2657, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC 20520. Comments may be submitted electronically to: *southernlights@state.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the proposed project or to receive a copy of the Draft LSr EA when it is issued, contact Elizabeth Orlando at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice by electronic or regular mail as listed above, or by telephone

(202)647-4284, or by fax at

(202)647-5947. More information on the Enbridge LSr Project application for a Presidential Permit, including associated maps and drawings will be downloadable in its entirety from an Enbridge hosted project Web site that is being established for this purpose and will be accessible from: *http://www.enbridgeUS.com/publicinfo.* This Web site is expected to be operational on or about August 13, 2007. This Web site will NOT accept public comments for the record, but it will provide a link to the Department of State project e-mail address noted above. Department of State Presidential Permit information and process can be found at: *http://www.state.gov/e/eeb/c9986.htm.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background and Need for Agency Action The Department of State has received an application from Enbridge Pipelines (Southern Lights) L.L.C. (“Enbridge”) for a Presidential Permit, pursuant to Executive Order 13337 of April 30, 2004, to construct, connect, operate, and maintain a 20-inch crude oil and liquid hydrocarbon pipeline at the U.S.-Canadian border at Neche, Pembina County, North Dakota, for the purpose of transporting liquid hydrocarbons and other petroleum products between the United States and Canada. Enbridge seeks this authorization in connection with its Southern Lights Pipeline Project (“LSr Project”), which is designed to transport Canadian crude oil from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin (“WCSB”) to existing refinery markets in the Midwest region of the United States. The project description set forth in this notice is based on information provided by Enbridge in its Presidential permit application. Enbridge is planning to increase its ability to provide additional supplies of petroleum to markets in the United States in response to customer requests and marketplace demands. To fulfill this goal, Enbridge has embarked upon an expansion program to increase its transportation capacity. The Enbridge Expansion Program is specifically designed to increase petroleum transportation services from the increasingly accessible oil sands supply in the WCSB to refineries in the Midwest. Enbridge proposes to construct and operate a petroleum pipeline and related facilities from Cromer, Manitoba, Canada, to Clearbrook, Minnesota in the United States. The LSr Project would have the capacity to deliver 186,000 barrels per day

(bpd)of petroleum from a supply hub near Cromer, Manitoba to an existing terminal in Clearbrook, Minnesota. In total, the LSr Project would consist of approximately 313 miles of new pipeline in total. The proposed system expansion would include the construction of approximately 136 miles of new 20-inch-diameter pipeline from the United States-Canada border near Neche, North Dakota to the existing Enbridge tank farm in Clearbrook, Minnesota for the transportation of petroleum. Enbridge proposes to construct the pipeline generally along its existing pipeline right-of-way. In Canada, the project would involve the construction of approximately 178 miles of new pipeline from Cromer, Manitoba to the United States-Canada border. Appropriate regulatory authorities in Canada will conduct an independent environmental review for the Canadian facilities. The LSr Project also would require modifications at existing pump stations and the construction of delivery facilities and mainline valves. Modifications of the pump stations would occur at locations necessary to maintain adequate flow through the pipeline. Mainline valves would be installed and located as dictated by the hydraulic characteristics of the transported petroleum. Enbridge proposes to begin construction of the project in mid-2008. Construction would occur over approximately 6 months, with an in-service date on or before December 31, 2008. U.S. counties that could possibly be affected by construction of the proposed pipeline are: *North Dakota:* Pembina. *Minnesota:* Kittson, Marshall, Pennington, Red Lake, Polk, Clearwater. The LSr Project would be constructed within or adjacent to Enbridge's existing right-of-way between the United States-Canadian border near Neche, North Dakota and Clearbrook, Minnesota. Construction of the proposed pipeline would generally require a 100-foot-wide construction right-of-way to allow temporary storage of topsoil and spoil and to accommodate safe operation of construction equipment. The spoil side (i.e., topsoil and ditch spoil stockpile area) would typically be 25 feet wide and generally located within the existing maintained right-of-way. The working side (i.e., equipment work area and travel lane) would typically be 75 feet wide and partially located outside the existing maintained right-of-way. Following construction, up to a 50-foot-wide permanent right-of-way in addition to the existing permanent right-of-way will be maintained for operation of the pipeline. Dated: July 23, 2007. David Brown, Director, Office of Environmental Policy, Bureau of International Oceans, Environment and Scientific Affairs, U.S. Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-14488 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-07-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Third Meeting, Special Committee 213 Enhanced Flight Vision Systems/Synthetic Vision System, (EFVS/SVS) AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 213, Enhanced Flight Vision Systems/Synthetic Vision System, (EFVS/SVS). SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 213, Enhanced Flight Vision Systems/Synthetic Vision System, (EFVS/SVS). DATES: The meeting will be held August 21-23, 2007 from 9 a.m.-5 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Hilton Gardens 1801 East Valley Road, Renton, WA 98055. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC, 20036; telephone

(202)833-9339; fax

(202)833-9434; Web site *http://www.rtca.org* for directions. Hilton Gardens: telephone

(425)430-1414. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is hereby given for a Special Committee 213 meeting. The agenda will include: • August 21: • Opening Plenary Session (Welcome, Introductions, and Agenda Review). • Review SC-213 Objectives, Action Items, and SC-213 Web site content. • Review initial reports from WG 1, and WG 2. • Presentations. • Afternoon: WG 1 and WG 2 meetings. • August 22: • WG 1 and WG 2 meeting. • August 23: • Morning: Work Group meetings and development of actions items. • Afternoon: Plenary. • Review action items and • Define next steps for continued MASPS development. • Closing Plenary Session (Other Business, Establish date and time for next meeting, Adjourn). Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may present a written statement to the committee at any time. Issued in Washington, DC, on July 23, 2007. Francisco Estrada C., RTCA Advisory Committee. [FR Doc. 07-3677 Filed 7-26-07; 8:45 am]

Proposed Rules. Request for comment