Notices. Notice

35,137 words·~160 min read·/register/2007/08/22/07-4106

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

BILLING CODE 3210-01-M RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD Proposed Collection; Comment Request *Summary:* In accordance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 which provides opportunity for public comment on new or revised data collections, the Railroad Retirement Board

(RRB)will publish periodic summaries of proposed data collections. *Comments are invited on:*

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

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

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden related to the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Title and Purpose of Information Collection Application and Claim for Unemployment Benefits and Employment Service, OMB 3220-0022. Section 2 of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (RUIA), provides unemployment benefits for qualified railroad employees. These benefits are generally payable for each day of unemployment in excess of four during a registration period (normally a period of 14 days). Section 12 of the RUIA provides that the RRB establish, maintain and operate free employment facilities directed toward the reemployment of railroad employees. The procedures for applying for the unemployment benefits and employment service and for registering and claiming the benefits are prescribed in 20 CFR part 325. The RRB utilizes the following forms to collect the information necessary to pay unemployment benefits: Form UI-1 (or its Internet equivalent, Form UI-1 (Internet), *Application for Unemployment Benefits and Employment Service* , is completed by a claimant for unemployment benefits once in a benefit year, at the time of first registration. Completion of Form UI-1 or UI-1 (Internet) also registers an unemployment claimant for the RRB's employment service. The RRB proposes no changes to Form UI-1 or UI-1 (Internet). The RRB also utilizes Form UI-3, (or its Internet equivalent Form UI-3 (Internet) *Claim for Unemployment Benefits* for use in claiming unemployment benefits for days of unemployment in a particular registration period, normally a period of 14 days. The RRB proposes no changes to Form UI-3 or UI-3 (Internet). Completion of Forms UI-1, UI-1 (Internet), UI-3 and UI-3 (Internet) is required to obtain or retain benefits. The number of responses required of each claimant varies, depending on their period of unemployment. The RRB estimates that approximately 9,977 Form UI-1's (9257 paper and 720 Internet) will be filed annually. Completion time for Form UI-1 and UI-1 (Internet) is estimated at 10 minutes. The RRB estimates that approximately 74,326 Form UI-3's (65,035 manual and 9,291 Internet) will be filed annually. Completion time for Form UI-3 and the UI-3 (Internet) is estimated at 6 minutes. *Additional Information or Comments:* To request more information or to obtain a copy of the information collection justification, forms, and/or supporting material, please call the RRB Clearance Officer at

(312)751-3363 or send an e-mail request to *Charles.Mierzwa@RRB.GOV.* Comments regarding the information collection should be addressed to Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2092 or send an e-mail to *Ronald.Hodapp@RRB.GOV* . Written comments should be received within 60 days of this notice. Charles Mierzwa, Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7-16590 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7905-01-P RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD Agency Forms Submitted for OMB Review, Request for Comments *Summary:* In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Railroad Retirement Board

(RRB)is forwarding an Information Collection Request

(ICR)to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)to request an extension of a currently approved collection of information: 3220-0097, consisting of Form UI-1e, Pay Rate Report. Our ICR describes the information we seek to collect from the public. Review and approval by OIRA ensures that we impose appropriate paperwork burdens. The RRB invites comments on the proposed collection of information to determine

(1)the practical utility of the collection;

(2)the accuracy of the estimated burden of the collection;

(3)ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information that is the subject of collection; and

(4)ways to minimize the burden of collections on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments to RRB or OIRA must contain the OMB control number of the ICR. For proper consideration of your comments, it is best if RRB and OIRA receive them within 30 days of publication date. Under Section 2(a) of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act, the daily benefit rate for unemployment and sickness benefits depends on the claimant's last daily rate of pay in the base year. The procedures pertaining to the use of a claimant's daily pay rate in determining the daily benefit rate are prescribed in 20 CFR part 330. The RRB utilizes Form UI-1e, Request for Pay Rate Information, to obtain information from a claimant about their last railroad employer and pay rate, when it is not available from other RRB records. Form UI-1e also explains the possibility of receiving a higher daily benefit rate if claimants report their daily rate of pay for railroad work in the base year. Completion is required to obtain or retain benefits. One response is requested of each respondent. *Previous Requests for Comments:* The RRB has already published the initial 60-day notice (72 FR 9594 on March 2, 2007) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That request elicited no comments. Information Collection Request

(ICR)*Title:* Pay Rate Report. *OMB Control Number:* 3220-0097. *Form(s) submitted:* UI-1e. *Type of request:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected public:* Individuals or households. *Abstract:* Under the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act, the daily benefit rate for unemployment and sickness benefits depends on the employee's last daily rate of pay. The report obtains the claimed rate of pay from the employee that is used to determine whether an increase in the daily benefit rate is due. *Changes Proposed:* The RRB proposes no changes to Form UI-45. *The burden estimate for the ICR is as follows:* *Estimated Completion Time for Form UI-1e:* 5 minutes. *Estimated annual number of respondents:* 350. *Total annual responses:* 350. *Total annual reporting hours:* 29. *Additional Information or Comments:* Copies of the forms and supporting documents can be obtained from Charles Mierzwa, the agency clearance officer (312-751-3363) or *Charles.Mierzwa@rrb.gov.* Comments regarding the information collection should be sent to Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2092 or *Ronald.Hodapp@RRB.GOV,* and to the Office of Management Budget at ATTN: Desk Officer for RRB, Fax:

(202)395-6974 or via e-mail to *OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov* . Charles Mierzwa, Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7-16592 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7905-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56269; File No. SR-Amex-2007-75] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendments No. 1 and 2, To Establish a Directed Order Program August 15, 2007. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on July 24, 2007, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. On July 30, 2007, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. On August 15, 2007, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons and is approving the proposed rule change, as amended, 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 adopt Amex Rule 996-ANTE and amend Amex rule 935-ANTE establishing the Exchange's Directed Order Program (the “Program”). The text of the proposed rule change is available on Exchange's Web site ( *http://www.amex.com* ), at Amex's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, Amex included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item III below. Amex has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange proposes to adopt rules establishing the Exchange's Directed Order Program (the “Program”). Proposed Rule 996-ANTE provides that specialists, Registered Options Traders (“ROTs”), Supplemental Registered Options Traders (“SROTs”), and Remote Registered Options Traders (“RROTs”) (collectively, the “Directed Order Participants”) 3 may choose to enter into arrangements with an Order Flow Provider, 4 whereby a Directed Order Participant would be directed orders upon meeting certain eligibility requirements. 3 The Exchange's SROT and RROT programs were recently approved by the Commission on April 12, 2006 and April 13, 2006, respectively. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53635 (April 12, 2006), 71 FR 20144 (April 12, 2006) (order approving the SROT program) and 53652 (April 13, 2006), 71 FR 20422 (April 20, 2006) (order approving the RROT program). 4 Order Flow Providers are defined in proposed Rule 996-ANTE as any member or member organization that submits, as agent, customer orders to the Exchange. Eligibility The Exchange will allow for the receipt of marketable orders, through the Exchange's order routing system when the Exchange's disseminated quote is the NBBO, where the order flow providing firm (“Order Flow Provider”) 5 transmitting that order has specified a specialist, ROT, SROT or RROT in that class as the Directed Order Participant for its orders that class. To be eligible for the Program the Directed Order Participant:

(i)Must submit quotes electronically through the Exchange's ANTE system, in options classes in which it is assigned;

(ii)must comply with its quoting obligations under Exchange rules and provide continuous two-sided quotations in not less than 100% of the series of each class for which it receives directed orders; and

(iii)must also be quoting at the best bid or offer on the Exchange (the “ABBO”). 6 5 An “Order Flow Provider” is any member or member organization that submits, as agent, customer orders to the Exchange. *See* proposed Rule 996-ANTE(d). 6 Pursuant to Exchange Rule 958-ANTE(h)(iii)(A), ROTs are responsible for quoting continuous two-sided markets in a certain percentage of series based on the volume of contracts executed electronically on the Exchange during the previous quarter. Pursuant to Exchange Rules 993-ANTE (c)(ii) and 994-ANTE (c)(iv), SROTs and RROTs are responsible for quoting continuous two-sided markets in 60% of the series of their assigned classes. Enhanced Participation and Allocation An eligible Directed Order Participant who is directed orders will receive an enhanced participation equal to the greater of 40% of the remaining directed orders, when more than one market participant is quoting at the ABBO, or the amount the Directed Order Participant would be entitled to receive pursuant to the allocation algorithm set forth in Rule 935-ANTE(a)(4). The enhanced participation rate is based on the number of contracts remaining after all non-broker-dealer customer orders in the book at the best price have been satisfied. If an eligible Directed Order Participant receives enhanced participation under the rule, then no other participation entitlement set forth in Amex Rules shall apply to such order. The eligible Directed Order Participant must also be quoting at the ABBO to receive the guaranteed percentage, and can never be allocated more contracts than his quote size. 7 Any contracts remaining after the eligible Directed Order Participant has received his allocation shall be allocated among the remaining participants according to the allocation algorithm set forth in Rule 935-ANTE(a)(4). No participant will be allocated contracts in excess of the size of his disseminated quote. 7 The allocation algorithm in Rule 935-ANTE (a)(4) is comprised of a Component A and a Component B. Component A is the parity component of the algorithm. In this component all market participants (except for non-broker-dealer customers) who were either quoting or had orders at the ABBO will be treated equally. Accordingly, the percentage used for Component A is an equal percentage derived by dividing 100 by the number of market participants at the ABBO. Component B is the size pro rata component and is designed to reward market participants who quote in size. The percentage used for Component B is the percentage that the size of each market participant's quote or order at the ABBO represents relative to the total number of contracts in the disseminated bid (for sell orders) and offer (for buy orders). The weight each component will have in the final percentage used to allocate executed contracts will initially be equal. Finally, the Exchange notes that an eligible Directed Order Participant may not step up and match the ABBO after it receives an order, but must be publicly quoting at the ABBO when the order is received. 8 An Order Flow Provider is prohibited from notifying a Directed Order Participant of its intention to submit a directed order, so that the Directed Order Participant may not change its quotation to match the ABBO immediately prior to the submission of the directed order, and then fade his quote. Specifically, the Exchange currently has rules in place to prevent such conduct as being inconsistent with just and equitable principles of trade and to prevent the misuse of material non-public information. 9 8 The Exchange's disseminated quote must be at the NBBO at the time of receipt of the Directed Order. *See* proposed Rule 996-ANTE(a). 9 *See* Amex Rules 3(j) and 16. The Exchange proposes that the effective date of the Program shall be August 20, 2007. 10 10 *See* Amendment No. 2. 2. Statutory Basis The proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act 11 in general and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 12 in particular in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of change, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system. 11 15 U.S.C. 78f. 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. 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-Amex-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-Amex-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 Amex. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2007-75 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 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 is consistent with the requirements of section 6 of the Act 13 and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange 14 , and, in particular, the requirements of section 6(b)(5) of the Act. 15 Section 6(b)(5) requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 13 15 U.S.C. 78f. 14 In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 16 the Commission may not approve any proposed rule change, or amendment thereto, prior to the 30th day after the date of publication of notice of the filing thereof, unless the Commission finds good cause for so doing and publishes its reasons for so finding. The Commission notes that the proposed rule change is substantially similar to rule changes by CBOE and ISE that were recently approved by the Commission on a permanent basis. 17 The Commission believes that the proposed rule changes to establish a Directed Order Program on the Amex do not raise additional significant regulatory issues that have not been previously considered by the Commission. Accordingly, the Commission hereby finds good cause for approving the proposed rule change, as amended, prior to the 30th day after publishing notice thereof in the **Federal Register** . 16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 17 *See, e.g.* , Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51799 (June 2, 2005), 70 FR 33564 (June 8, 2005) (order approving SR-CBOE-2004-71), 55826 (May 29, 2007), 72 FR 31357 (SR-CBOE-2007-47) (permanent approval of CBOE's Preferred Market-Maker Program), 51759 (May 27, 2005), 70 FR 32860 (June, 6, 2005) (order approving SR-Phlx-2004-91), 51818 (June 10, 2005), 70 FR 35146 (June 16, 2005) (order approving SR-ISE-2005-18), and 55864 (June 5, 2007), 72 FR 32378 (SR ISE 2007-35) (permanent approval of the ISE's pilot program for preferenced orders). The Commission has previously approved a rule that guarantees a specialist a portion of each order when the specialists quote is equal to the ABBO. 18 The Commission has closely scrutinized exchange rule proposals to adopt or amend a participation guarantee where the percentage of participation would rise to a level that could have a material adverse impact on quote competition within a particular exchange. 19 Because the proposal would not increase the overall percentage of an order that is guaranteed beyond the currently acceptable threshold, but instead would allow any specialist, ROT, SROT or RROT appointed to an options class to be designated as a Directed Order Participant and be eligible to receive an enhanced participation guarantee instead of the specialist, the Commission does not believe that the proposal will negatively impact quote competition on the Exchange. Under the proposal, the remaining portion of each order will still be allocated based on the competitive bidding of market participants. 18 *See, e.g.* , Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49747 (May 20, 2004), 69 FR 30344 (May 27, 2004) (SR-Amex-2003-89). 19 *See, e.g.* , Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43100 (July 31, 2000), 65 FR 48788 (August 9, 2000). Under the proposal, in order to be eligible to receive an participation guarantee in any options series, the Exchange proposes to require that a specialist, ROT, SROT, or RROT maintain continuous quotes in not less than 100% of the series of any options class it for which it receives Directed Orders. 20 In addition, a Directed Order Participant will have to be quoting at the NBBO at the time the Directed Order is received to capitalize on the enhanced participation guarantee. 21 The Commission believes it is critical that the Directed Order Participate cannot step up and match the NBBO after it receives an order, but must be publicly quoting at that price when the order is received. In this regard, the Exchange's proposal prohibits an Order Flow Provider from notifying a Directed Order Participant of its intention to submit a Directed Order, so that the Directed Order Participant may not change its quotation to match the ABBO prior to the submission of the Directed Order, and then fade his quote. The Exchange represented that it has rules in place to prevent such conduct as being inconsistent with just and equitable principles of trade and to prevent the misuse of material non-public information. 22 Furthermore, the Exchange represented that it will proactively conduct surveillance for compliance with the applicable rules in conjunction with the Exchange's Directed Order Flow Program and enforce these rules. 20 *See* Amex Rule 996-ANTE. The specialist, ROT, SROT, or RROT also must have an appointment/allocation in such options class. *Id* . 21 Specifically, Rule 996-ANTE requires a Directed Order Participant to be quoting at the ABBO while the Exchange's disseminated quote is the NBBO in order to be eligible to receive an enhanced participation for the order. 22 *See* Amex Rules 3(j) and 16. The Commission emphasizes that approval of this proposal does not affect a broker-dealer's duty of best execution. A broker-dealer has a legal duty to seek to obtain best execution of customer orders, and any decision to preference a particular specialist, ROT, SROT, or RROT must be consistent with this duty. 23 A broker-dealer's duty of best execution derives from common law agency principles and fiduciary obligations, and is incorporated in rules of self-regulatory organization and, through judicial and Commission decisions, the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws. 24 23 *See, e.g., Newton* v. *Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.* , 135 F.3d 266, 269-70, 274 (3d Cir.), *cert. denied* , 525 U.S. 811 (1998); *Certain Market Making Activities on Nasdaq* , Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40900 (January 11, 1999) (settled case) (citing *Sinclair* v. *SEC* , 444 F.2d 399 (2d Cir. 1971); *Arleen Hughes* , 27 SEC 629, 636 (1948), *aff'd sub nom. Hughes* v. *SEC* , 174 F.2d 969 (D.C. Cir. 1949)). *See also* Order Execution Obligations, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 37619A (September 6, 1996), 61 FR 48290 (September 12, 1996) (“Order Handling Rules Release”). 24 Order Handling Rules Release, 61 FR at 48322. *See also Newton* , 135 F.3d at 270. Failure to satisfy the duty of best execution can constitute fraud because a broker-dealer, in agreeing to execute a customer's order, makes an implied representation that it will execute it in a manner that maximizes the customer's economic gain in the transaction. *See Newton* , 135 F.3d at 273 (“[T]he basis for the duty of best execution is the mutual understanding that the client is engaging in the trade—and retaining the services of the broker as his agent—solely for the purpose of maximizing his own economic benefit, and that the broker receives her compensation because she assists the client in reaching that goal.”); *Marc N. Geman* , Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43963 (February 14, 2001) (citing *Newton* , but concluding that respondent fulfilled his duty of best execution). *See also* Payment for Order Flow, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34902 (October 27, 1994), 59 FR 55006, 55009 (November 2, 1994) (“Payment for Order Flow Final Rules”). If the broker-dealer intends not to act in a manner that maximizes the customer's benefit when he accepts the order and does not disclose this to the customer, the broker-dealer's implied representation is false. *See Newton* , 135 F.3d at 273-274. The duty of best execution requires broker-dealers to execute customers' trades at the most favorable terms reasonably available under the circumstances, *i.e.* , at the best reasonably available price. 25 The duty of best execution requires broker-dealers to periodically assess the quality of competing markets to assure that order flow is directed to the markets providing the most beneficial terms for their customer orders. 26 Broker-dealers must examine their procedures for seeking to obtain best execution in light of market and technology changes and modify those practices if necessary to enable their customers to obtain the best reasonably available prices. 27 In doing so, broker-dealers must take into account price improvement opportunities, and whether different markets may be more suitable for different types of orders or particular securities. 28 25 *Newton* , 135 F.3d at 270. *Newton* also noted certain factors relevant to best execution—order size, trading characteristics of the security, speed of execution, clearing costs, and the cost and difficulty of executing an order in a particular market. *Id* . at 270 n. 2 (citing Payment for Order Flow, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 33026 (October 6, 1993), 58 FR 52934, 52937-38 (October 13, 1993) (Proposed Rules)). *See In re E.F. Hutton & Co* . (“Manning”), Securities Exchange Act Release No. 25887 (July 6, 1988). *See also* Payment for Order Flow Final Rules, 59 FR at 55008-55009. 26 Order Handling Rules Release, 61 FR at 48322-48333 (“In conducting the requisite evaluation of its internal order handling procedures, a broker-dealer must regularly and rigorously examine execution quality likely to be obtained from different markets or market makers trading a security.”). *See also Newton* , 135 F.3d at 271; Market 2000: An Examination of Current Equity Market Developments V-4 (SEC Division of Market Regulation January 1994) (“Without specific instructions from a customer, however, a broker-dealer should periodically assess the quality of competing markets to ensure that its order flow is directed to markets providing the most advantageous terms for the customer's order.”); Payment for Order Flow Final Rules, 59 FR at 55009. 27 Order Handling Rules, 61 FR at 48323. 28 Order Handling Rules, 61 FR at 48323. For example, in connection with orders that are to be executed at a market opening price, “[b]roker-dealers are subject to a best execution duty in executing customer orders at the opening, and should take into account the alternative methods in determining how to obtain best execution for their customer orders.” Disclosure of Order Execution and Routing Practices, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43590 (November 17, 2000), 65 FR 75414, 75422 (December 1, 2000) (adopting new Rules 11Ac1-5 and 11Ac1-6 under the Act and noting that alternative methods offered by some Nasdaq market centers for pre-open orders included the mid-point of the spread or at the bid or offer). For these reasons, the Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 29 and will not jeopardize market integrity or the incentive for market participants to post competitive quotes. 30 29 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 30 Approval of this proposal is in no way an endorsement of payment for order flow by the Commission. V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 31 that the proposed rule change (SR-Amex-2007-75), as modified by Amendments No. 1 and 2, be, and hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis. 31 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 32 32 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-16468 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56262; File No. SR-Amex-2007-86] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend a Pilot Program That Increases Position and Exercise Limits for Equity Options and Options on the Nasdaq-100 Tracking Stock August 15, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on August 8, 2007, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by Amex. The Exchange has filed the proposal as 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 it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange seeks a six-month extension of its pilot program increasing the standard position and exercise limits for options on the QQQQ and equity option classes traded on the Exchange (“Pilot Program”). The text of the proposed rule change is available at Amex, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.amex.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, Amex included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. 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 requesting to extend its current Pilot Program increasing the standard position and exercise limits for options on the QQQQ and equity option classes traded on the Exchange for a time period of six months from September 1, 2007, through and including March 1, 2008. In March 2005, the Exchange established the Pilot Program for a six- month period. 5 Under the Pilot Program, position and exercise limits for options on the QQQQ and equity options classes traded on the Exchange were increased to the following levels: 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51316 (March 3, 2005), 70 FR 12251 (March 11, 2005) (SR-Amex-2005-029). The Pilot Program was extended four times and is due to expire on September 1, 2007. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 55226 (February 1, 2007), 72 FR 6300 (February 9, 2007) (SR-Amex-2007-15); 54386 (August 30, 2006), 71 FR 52831 (September 7, 2006) (SR-Amex-2006-75); 53349 (February 22, 2006), 71 FR 10571 (March 1, 2006) (SR-Amex-2006-07); and 52260 (August 15, 2005), 70 FR 48991 (August 22, 2005) (SR-Amex-2005-082). 6 Except when the Pilot Program is in effect. Current equity option contract limit 6 Pilot program equity option contract limit 13,500 25,000 22,500 50,000 31,500 75,000 60,000 200,000 75,000 250,000 Current QQQQ option contract limit Pilot program QQQQ option contract limit 300,000 900,000 The standard position limits were last increased on December 31, 1998. 7 Since that time there has been a steady increase in the number of accounts that:

(a)Approach the position limit;

(b)exceed the position limit; and

(c)are granted an exemption to the standard limit. Several member firms have petitioned the options exchanges to either eliminate position limits, or in lieu of total elimination, increase the current levels and expand the available hedge exemptions. In addition, a significant number of accounts that maintain sizable positions are utilizing the Pilot Program's increased equity option contract limits. Furthermore, overall volume in the options market has continually increased over the past five years. The Exchange believes that the increase in options volume and lack of evidence of market manipulation occurrences over the past twenty years justifies the proposed increases in the position and exercise limits. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40875 (December 31, 1998), 64 FR The Exchange has not encountered any problems or difficulties relating to the Pilot Program since its inception. The instant proposed rule change makes no substantive change to the Pilot Program other than to extend it for six months through and including March 1, 2008. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 8 in general and furthers the objective of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 9 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would impose no 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 by the Exchange on this proposal. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change does not:

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

(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(3)become operative for 30 days from the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 10 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 11 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 12 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 13 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest because it will allow the Pilot Program to continue uninterrupted. For this reason, the Commission designates that the proposed rule change become operative immediately. 14 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. Amex has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement. 13 *Id.* 14 For purposes only of waiving the operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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 Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-Amex-2007-86 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Amex-2007-86. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 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 will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of Amex. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Amex-2007-86 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-16526 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56273; File No. SR-Amex-2007-91] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Add an Additional Exemption to Rule 24-AEMI Relating to Intermarket Sweep Orders August 16, 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 August 16, 2007, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by Amex. Amex filed the proposal as 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(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Amex proposes to amend Rule 24-AEMI to add an additional exemption to its general rule against a member executing a proprietary order while in possession of a customer order which could trade at the same price. The exemption would permit a member organization to send an intermarket sweep order (“ISOs”) as principal under Regulation NMS, provided that the member organization yields its principal execution to any open customer order that is required to be protected by Rule 24-AEMI and is capable of being filled. In addition, if the member organization executed the ISO to facilitate a customer order at a price inferior to one or more protected quotations, that customer must consent to not receiving the better prices obtained by the ISO or the firm must yield its principal execution to that customer. The Exchange proposes this change to better harmonize Rule 24-AEMI with recent changes to the corresponding Rule 92 of the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”). The text of the proposed rule change is available on Exchange's Web site ( *http://www.amex.com* ), at Amex's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, Amex included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. Amex has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 24-AEMI to add an exemption so that a member organization can comply with its Regulation NMS obligation without also violating Rule 24-AEMI when facilitating a customer order that would otherwise require the firm to either violate Rule 24-AEMI or trade through protected quotations. Under the current rule, if a member organization is required to route an ISO as principal to execute against the full displayed size of any protected quotation in a security, for example, when facilitating a customer order at a price inferior to the national best bid or offer or other protected quotations and in compliance with Rules 600(b)(30)(ii) and 611(b)(6) of Regulation NMS, 5 the ISO could violate Rule 24-AEMI by trading ahead of or along with an open customer order. 5 17 CFR 242.600(b)(30)(ii) and 17 CFR 242.611(b)(6). The proposed exemption provides that, when routing an ISO, the member organization must yield its principal execution to any open customer order that is required to be protected by Rule 24-AEMI and is capable of accepting the fill. As defined in Rule 24-AEMI(a), a customer order that is required to be protected is an open customer order that is known to the member organization before entry of the ISO. In addition, the proposed exemption would require that, if a firm executes an ISO to facilitate a customer order at a price inferior to one or more protected quotations, that customer must consent to not receiving the better price obtained by the ISO or the firm must yield its principal execution to that customer. For purposes of this amendment, the Exchange further proposes adopting the definitions of Regulation NMS in connection with the terms “protected quotation” and “intermarket sweep order.” 6 6 *See* 17 CFR 242.600(b)(30) and (58). 2. Statutory Basis The proposed rule change is designed to be consistent with Regulation NMS and with Section 6(b) of the Act 7 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 8 in particular in that the Exchange's proposed rules are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change is subject to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 9 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder 10 because the proposal:

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

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

(iii)does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest; provided that the self-regulatory organization has given the Commission notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). Amex has requested that the Commission waive the five-day pre-filing requirement and the 30-day operative delay in order to enable the Exchange to implement this rule change on an expeditious basis, noting, in particular, the commencement of full industry compliance with Rules 610 and 611 of Regulation NMS during the “All Stocks Phase” that begins on August 20, 2007. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because the proposed rule change adds an exemption to Rule 24-AEMI that is identical to that approved as part of recent amendments to corresponding Rule 92 of the NYSE and does not raise any new issues of regulatory concern. 11 For these reasons, the Commission waives the 30-day operative delay. 12 The Commission also waives the five-day pre-filing requirement. 11 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56017 (July 5, 2007), 72 FR 38110 (July 12, 2007). 12 For purposes only of waiving the operative delay for this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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 13 *See* Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). 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-Amex-2007-91 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2007-91. 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 Amex. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2007-91 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-16556 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56268; File No. SR-BSE-2007-41] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Time Period for the Position Limits Pilot Program August 15, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on August 15, 2007, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (“BSE” 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 BSE. The Exchange has filed the proposal as 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 it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change BSE proposes to amend Chapter III, Section 7 (Position Limits) of the Rules of the Boston Options Exchange (“BOX”), an options trading facility of BSE, to extend its current pilot program to increase the standard position and exercise limits for equity option contracts and options on the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock (“QQQQ”) (“Pilot Program”). The text of the proposed rule change is available at BSE, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.bostonstock.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, BSE included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Pilot Program provides for an increase to the standard position and exercise limits for equity option contracts and for options on QQQQs for a six-month period. 5 Specifically, the Pilot Program increased the applicable position and exercise limits for equity options and options on the QQQQ to the following levels: 5 The Pilot Program, which began on March 3, 2005, was extended on August 15, 2005, February 22, 2006, August 30, 2006, and February 8, 2007. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51317 (March 3, 2005), 70 FR 12254 (March 11, 2005) (SR-BSE-2005-10) (“Pilot Program Notice”); 52264 (August 15, 2005), 70 FR 48992 (August 22, 2005) (SR-BSE-2005-37); 53347 (February 22, 2006), 71 FR 10573 (March 1, 2006) (SR-BSE-2006-07); 54388 (August 30, 2006), 71 FR 52833 (September 7, 2006) (SR-BSE-2006-32); and 55260 (February 8, 2007), 72 FR 7487 (February 15, 2007) (SR-BSE-2007-04). 6 Except when the Pilot Program is in effect. Current equity option contract limit 6 Pilot program equity option contract limit 13,500 25,000 22,500 50,000 31,500 75,000 60,000 200,000 75,000 250,000 Current QQQQ Option Contract Limit Pilot Program QQQQ Option Contract Limit 300,000 900,000 The Exchange believes that extending the Pilot Program for six months is warranted due to positive feedback from members and for the reasons cited in the original rule filing that proposed the adoption of the Pilot Program. 7 In addition, BOX has not encountered any problems or difficulties relating to the Pilot Program since its inception. For these reasons, the BSE requests that the Commission extend the Pilot Program for an additional six months, through and including March 1, 2008. 7 *See* Pilot Program Notice, *supra* note 5. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 8 in general, and furthers the objective of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 9 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors and the public interest. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change does not:

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

(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(3)become operative for 30 days from the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 10 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 11 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 12 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 13 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest because it will allow the Pilot Program to continue uninterrupted. For this reason, the Commission designates that the proposed rule change become operative immediately. 14 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. BSE has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement. 13 *Id.* 14 For purposes only of waiving the operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. * See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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 Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File No. SR-BSE-2007-41 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-BSE-2007-41. 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 will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of BSE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-BSE-2007-41 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. 6 [FR Doc. E7-16530 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56266; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-97] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Extension of a Pilot Program That Increases the Standard Position and Exercise Limits for Certain Options Traded on the Exchange August 15, 2007. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on August 7, 2007, the 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 and II below, which Items have been prepared by CBOE. The Exchange has filed the proposal as 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 it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change CBOE proposes to extend an existing pilot program that increases the standard position and exercise limits for certain options traded on the Exchange (“Pilot Program”). The text of the proposed rule change is available at CBOE, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.cboe.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, 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. 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 Pilot Program, as previously approved by the Commission, provides for an increase to the standard position and exercise limits for equity option contracts and for options on QQQQs for a six-month period. 5 Specifically, the Pilot Program increased the applicable position and exercise limits for equity options and options on the QQQQ in accordance with the following levels: 5 The Pilot Program was approved by the Commission on February 23, 2005. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51244 (February 23, 2005), 70 FR 10010 (March 1, 2005) (SR-CBOE-2003-30) (“Pilot Program Order”). The Pilot Program has been extended four times and is due to expire on September 1, 2007. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 52262 (August 15, 2005), 70 FR 48995 (August 22, 2005) (SR-CBOE-2005-61); 53348 (February 22, 2006), 71 FR 10574 (March 1, 2006) (SR-CBOE-2006-11); 54336 (August 18, 2006), 71 FR 50952 (August 28, 2006) (SR-CBOE-2006-69); and 55266 (February 9, 2007), 72 FR 7698 (February 16, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-12). Current equity option contract limit 6 Pilot program equity option contract limit 13,500 25,000 22,500 50,000 31,500 75,000 60,000 200,000 75,000 250,000 Current QQQQ Option Contract Limit Pilot Program QQQQ Option Contract Limit 300,000 900,000 The purpose of the proposed rule change is to extend the Pilot Program for an additional six-month period, through March 1, 2008. The Exchange believes that extending the Pilot Program for six months is warranted due to the positive feedback from members and for the reasons cited in the original rule filing that proposed the adoption of the Pilot Program. 7 Also, the Exchange has not encountered any problems or difficulties relating to the Pilot Program since its inception. For these reasons, the Exchange requests that the Commission extend the Pilot Program for the aforementioned additional period. 6 Except when the Pilot Program is in effect. 7 *See* Pilot Program Order, *supra* note 5. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements provided under Section 6(b)(5) 8 of the Act that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(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 forgoing rule change does not:

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

(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(3)become operative for 30 days after the date of this 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). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 11 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 12 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest because it will allow the Pilot Program to continue uninterrupted. For this reason, the Commission designates that the proposed rule change become operative immediately. 13 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. CBOE has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement. 12 *Id* . 13 For the purposes only of waiving the operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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 Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File No. SR-CBOE-2007-97 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-CBOE-2007-97. 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 will also 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 No. SR-CBOE-2007-97 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-16532 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56276; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-98] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Regarding Expansion of the Penny Pilot Program August 17, 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 August 14, 2007 the 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 the CBOE. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change CBOE proposes to amend its rules relating to an expansion of the Penny Pilot Program. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at ( *http://www.cboe.com* ), at the offices of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose CBOE proposes to amend its rules in connection with an expansion of the industry-wide Penny Pilot Program, which commenced on January 26, 2007. 3 CBOE believes expanding the Penny Pilot Program as proposed in this rule filing will allow further analysis over a longer period of time as to the impact of quoting and trading in these reduced increments on market participants, transparency, liquidity, market structure, and quote traffic. Currently, thirteen option classes participate in the Penny Pilot Program. 4 CBOE intends to expand the Penny Pilot Program in two phases. Phase I of the expansion would begin on September 28, 2007, last for six months, and add the following twenty-two option classes to the Penny Pilot Program. 5 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55154 (January 23, 2007), 72 FR 4743 (February 1, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2006-92). 4 CBOE recently extended the Penny Pilot Program in the thirteen classes until September 27, 2007. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56139 (July 26, 2007), 72 FR 42159 (August 1, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-86). 5 CBOE also intends to issue a Regulatory Circular, which will be published on its Web site, identifying these twenty-two option classes. SPDR S&P 500 (SPY/SPY) NYSE Euronext (NYX/NYX) Apple Inc. (AAPL/AAQ) Cisco Systems (CSCO/CYQ) Altria Group, Inc. (MO/MO) Financial Select Sector SPDR (XLF/XLF) Dendreon Corp. (DNDN/UKO) AT&T, Inc. (T/T) Amgen Inc. (AMGN/AMQ) Citigroup, Inc. (C/C) Yahoo! Inc. (YHOO/YHQ) Amazon.com Inc. (AMZN/ZQN) Qualcomm Inc. (QCOM/QAQ) Motorola Inc. (MOT/MOT) General Motors (GM/GM) Research in Motion Ltd. (RIMM/RUL) Energy Select Sector SPDR (XLE/XLE) Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold, Inc. (FCX/DPJ) Diamonds Trust (DIA/DIA) ConocoPhillips (COP/COP) Oil Services HLDRS (OIH/OIH) Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. (BMY/BMY) These twenty-two option classes are among the most actively traded multiply-listed option classes based on national average daily volume, and together with the existing thirteen Pilot classes, represent approximately 35% of the total industry volume. Phase II of the expansion would begin on March 28, 2008 and last for one year until March 27, 2009. It is currently anticipated that an additional twenty-eight option classes would be added to the Penny Pilot Program on March 28, 2008, bringing the total number of classes in the Pilot Program to 63. These twenty-eight new classes would be among the most active, multiply-listed option classes. CBOE intends to submit a proposed rule change pursuant to Section (b)(3)(A) of the Exchange Act announcing the names of these twenty-eight option classes prior to the beginning of Phase II. The minimum increments for all classes in the Penny Pilot, except for the QQQQs, would continue to be $0.01 for all option series below $3 (including LEAPS), and $0.05 for all option series $3 and above (including LEAPS). For QQQQs, the minimum increment would remain $0.01 for all option series. In connection with the expansion of the Penny Pilot Program, CBOE proposes to amend Rule 6.42(3) to specify in the rule text the minimum increments for the Pilot classes. Additionally, because SPDR options

(SPY)and options on Diamonds

(DIA)will participate in the Penny Pilot Program beginning on September 28, 2007, CBOE proposes to quote and trade two index option classes—Mini-SPX Index Options

(XSP)and options on the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJX), respectively, in the same minimum increments as SPY options and DIA options ( *i.e.* , $0.01 for all option series below $3, and $0.05 for all option series $3 and above). SPY options are options on the SPDR exchange-traded fund

(ETF)which is designed to track the performance of the S&P 500® Index. XSP options are options based on the S&P 500 ® Index. DIA options are options on an ETF that is designed to track the performance of the Dow Jones Industrial Average. DJX options are options based on the Dow Jones Industrial Average. CBOE believes it is important that these products, DIA and DJX, and SPY and XSP, have the same minimum increments for consistency and competitive reasons. Proposed new Interpretation .03 to Rule 6.42 addresses the minimum increments for the XSP and DJX option classes when SPY and DIA, respectively, participate in the Penny Pilot Program. CBOE intends to submit to the SEC reports analyzing the Penny Pilot Program for the following time periods: • May 1, 2007-September 27, 2007 • September 28, 2007-January 31, 2008 • February 1, 2008-July 31, 2008 • August 1, 2008-January 31, 2009 CBOE anticipates that its reports will assess the impact of the changes to the minimum increments during the specific time period being analyzed, including, among other things, effects on

(i)Market participants and customers;

(ii)market performance and quality, such as quoted spreads, effective spreads, and the displayed size in the Pilot classes; and

(iii)OPRA, vendor and exchange capacity. CBOE's reports should be submitted within one month following the end of the period being analyzed. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 6 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 7 in particular, in that the proposed rule change is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, serve 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. 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will 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 on the proposed rule change were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period

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

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

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

(B)Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. The Commission also requests and encourages interested persons to submit comments on the following specific questions: • Whether there are circumstances under which options classes included in the Penny Pilot should be removed from the Pilot? • If so, what factors should be considered in making the determination to remove an option class from the Penny Pilot? ○ Should an objective standard be used? For instance, should an option class come out of the Penny Pilot if its trading volume drops below a threshold amount? If so, what should that threshold be? Or, should an option class come out of the Penny Pilot if it is no longer among the most actively-traded options? If so, what should be considered the most-actively traded options? What statistics or analysis should be used to support a determination to remove an options class? ○ Should a more subjective analysis be allowed? If so, what factors should be taken into account? • What concerns might arise by removing an option from the Penny Pilot? How could such concerns be ameliorated? • How frequently should the analysis be undertaken ( *e.g.* , annually, bi-annually, quarterly), or should the evaluation be an automated process? • If a determination is made that an option should be removed from the Penny Pilot, how much notice should be given to market participants that the quoting increment will change? 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-2007-98 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-2007-98. 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 the CBOE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2007-98 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 8 8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-16582 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56275; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-26] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change To List and Trade Credit Default Basket Options, as Modified by Amendment No. 3, and Designating Credit Default Basket Options as Standardized Options Under Rule 9b-1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 August 17, 2007. I. Introduction On April 5, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “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 permit CBOE to list and trade cash-settled, binary options 3 based on the occurrence of credit events in the debt securities of one or more issuers, referred to as credit default basket options. On June 15, 2007, CBOE filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change; on June 19, 2007, CBOE withdrew Amendment No. 1 and filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change; and on June 21, 2007, CBOE withdrew Amendment No. 2 and filed Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change. 4 The proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 3, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on June 28, 2007 for a 15-day comment period. 5 The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 3, and designates credit default basket options as “standardized options” pursuant to Rule 9b-1 under the Act. 6 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 A binary option is a style of option having only two possible payoff outcomes: either a fixed amount or nothing at all. 4 Amendment No. 3 replaced the original filing in its entirety. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55938 (June 21, 2007), 72 FR 35523 (“CBOE Proposal”). 6 *See* 17 CFR 240.9b-1. Pursuant to Rule 9b-1(a)(4) under the Act, the Commission may, by order, designate as “standardized options” securities that do not otherwise meet the definition of “standardized options.” Standardized options are defined in Rule 9b-1(a)(4) as: “[O]ptions contracts trading on a national securities exchange, an automated quotations system of a registered securities association, or a foreign securities exchange which relate to options classes the terms of which are limited to specific expiration dates and exercise prices, or such other securities as the Commission may, by order, designate.” 17 CFR 240.9b-1(a)(4). II. Description of the CBOE Proposal A. Generally On June 6, 2007, the Commission approved a proposal by CBOE to list and trade credit default options, which are cash-settled binary options that are automatically exercised upon the occurrence of specified credit events or expire worthless. 7 CBOE now proposes to list and trade credit default basket options, which are cash-settled binary options based on a basket of at least two Reference Entities (described below). This proposal would add new rules applicable to credit default basket options and amend certain existing rules applicable to credit default options to make them applicable to credit default basket options. Credit default options are referenced to debt securities issued by a specified public company (“Reference Entity”) 8 and either have a fixed payout or expire worthless, depending upon whether a credit event occurs during the life of the option. Upon confirmation of a credit event prior to the last day of trading of a credit default option series, 9 the options positions existing as of that time are automatically exercised and the holders of long options positions receive a fixed cash payment of $100,000 per contract. 10 If no credit event is confirmed during the life of the option, the final settlement price is $0. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55871, 72 FR 32372 (June 12, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2006-84) (approving CBOE's proposal to list and trade credit default options) (“Credit Default Option Approval Order”). *See also* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55919 (June 18, 2007), 72 FR 34498 (June 22, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-62) (making various technical changes to CBOE's credit default option rules). 8 Proposed CBOE Rule 29.1(f) also includes as a “Reference Entity” the guarantor of the debt security underlying the credit default option. For purposes of credit default basket options, Reference Entities are referred to as “Basket Components.” *See* proposed CBOE Rule 29.1(h). 9 CBOE Rule 29.9(c) (to be relettered CBOE Rule 29.9(d)) requires that CBOE confirm the occurrence of a credit event through at least two sources, which may include announcements published via newswire services or information service companies, the names of which would be announced to the membership via a CBOE regulatory circular, or information contained in any order, decree, or notice of filing, however described, of or filed with the courts, the Commission, an exchange, an association, the Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”), or another regulatory agency or similar authority. 10 However, the settlement amount could be adjusted pursuant to proposed CBOE Rule 29.4. Credit default basket options are like credit default options, but instead of being based on the debt securities of one Reference Entity, they are based on the debt securities of two or more Reference Entities, or Basket Components. There would be two types of credit default basket options:

(i)Multiple payout credit default basket options that automatically pay holders a cash settlement amount each time a credit event is confirmed in a Basket Component during the life of the option, after which the applicable Basket Component would be removed from the basket, or expire worthless if no credit events are confirmed during the life of the option; and

(ii)single payout credit default basket options that automatically pay holders a single cash settlement amount when the first credit event is confirmed in any Basket Component, or expire worthless if no credit event for any Basket Component is confirmed during the life of the option. 11 Unlike a multiple payout credit default basket option, a single payout credit default basket option ceases trading after confirmation of the first credit event. 11 Credit events that trigger an automatic pay out include a failure to make payment pursuant to the terms of an underlying debt security and any other event of default specified by CBOE at the time it initially lists a particular class of credit default basket options. For each Basket Component, the events of default that CBOE may specify must be defined in accordance with the terms of the specific debt security underlying the Basket Component (each a “Reference Obligation”) or any other debt securities of the Basket Component other than non-recourse indebtedness (collectively with the Reference Obligation, “Relevant Obligations”). *See* proposed CBOE Rules 29.1(c) and 29.2A. The cash payout for credit default basket options is calculated differently than for credit default options. For both types of credit default basket options, each time a credit event is confirmed during the life of the option, the holder of the option would receive a cash payment per contract that is equal to one minus the Basket Component recovery rate specified by the Exchange at listing, multiplied by the notional face value of the applicable Basket Component. 12 For example, if there is a credit event in a Basket Component with notional face value of $10,000 and a recovery rate of 40%, the cash payment per contract would be $6,000. 13 As with credit default options, if no credit event is confirmed during the life of the option, the final settlement price would be $0. 12 At the time of listing, the Exchange will designate the notional face value and recovery rate of each Basket Component. *See* proposed CBOE Rule 29.2A (setting forth the requirements for the designation and terms of credit default basket options); and proposed CBOE Rules 29.1(a)(ii) and

(j)(setting forth the definitions for “cash settlement amount” for credit default basket options and “Notional Face Value of Basket Component,” respectively). 13 $10,000 × (1 − 0.40) = $6,000. B. Listing Standards Like credit default options, credit default basket options must conform to the initial and continued listing standards under proposed CBOE Chapter XXIX. 14 CBOE is proposing to list and trade only credit default basket options overlying debt securities of multiple Reference Entities each having at least one class of securities that is registered under the Act and is an “NMS stock” 15 as defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS under the Act. 16 Any registered equity security issued by the Reference Entity also would have to satisfy the requirements of CBOE Rule 5.4, which requires, among other things, that an equity security underlying an option be itself widely held and actively traded. 17 This requirement is designed to ensure that the issuer's securities enjoy widespread investor interest. The requirement that each Reference Entity be an issuer or guarantor of registered NMS stock will help ensure that investors have access to comprehensive public information about the Reference Entity, including the registration statement filed under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and other periodic reports. 18 14 CBOE is amending Chapter XXIX to make it applicable to all “Credit Options,” which would include credit default options and credit default basket options. 15 “NMS stock” means any security, or class of securities, other than an option for which transaction reports are collected, processed, and made available pursuant to an effective transaction reporting plan. *See* 17 CFR 242.600(b)(46) and (47). 16 *See* proposed CBOE Rule 5.3.11. 17 CBOE Rule 5.4 provides that, absent exceptional circumstances, an underlying security will not be deemed to meet the Exchange's requirements for continued approval when:

(i)There are fewer than 6,300,000 shares of the underlying security held by persons other than those who are required to report their security holdings under Section 16(a) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78p);

(ii)there are fewer than 1,600 holders of the underlying security;

(iii)the trading volume (in all markets in which the underlying security is traded) was less than 1,800,000 shares in the preceding 12 months;

(iv)the market price per share of the underlying security closed below $3 on the previous trading day, as measured by the closing price reported in the primary market in which the underlying security traded; or

(v)the underlying security ceases to be an NMS stock. 18 Section 13 of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78m, provides that any issuer of a security registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78 *l* , must file with the Commission annual reports and information and documents necessary to keep reasonably current the information in its Section 12 registration statement. Also, as with credit default options, a credit default basket option could not be exercised at the discretion of the investor, but instead would have an automatic payout only upon the occurrence of a credit event. The expiration date would be the fourth business day after the last day of trading of the series, which would be the third Friday of the expiration month. 19 The Exchange usually would open one to four series for each year up to 10.25 years from the current expiration. 20 19 For a single payout credit default basket option, if a credit event is confirmed, the expiration date would be the second business day after the confirmation of the first credit event. For a multiple payout credit default basket option, if a credit event is confirmed in every Basket Component, the expiration date would be the second business day after the confirmation of the last credit event. For either type of credit default basket options, if a Redemption Event is confirmed in all Basket Components, the expiration date would be the second business day after the last confirmation date. *See* proposed CBOE Rules 29.1(d)(ii) and (e)(ii). *See also* proposed CBOE Rule 29.4. 20 *See* proposed CBOE Rule 29.2A(b)(1) and (2). C. Trading The trading rules for credit default basket options would be consistent with those applicable to credit default options. Specifically, credit default basket options would trade on CBOE's Hybrid Trading System from 8:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. (Central Time) 21 in a manner similar to the trading of equity options. With limited distinctions, as described more fully in the proposal, CBOE's equity option trading rules would apply to credit default options. 22 Also, credit default basket options would be eligible for trading as Flexible Exchange Options (“FLEX Options”). A FLEX Option that is a credit default basket option would be cash-settled and the exercise-by-exception provisions of OCC Rule 805 23 would not apply. Market-makers would be appointed to credit default options pursuant to CBOE's existing requirements, 24 as supplemented by proposed CBOE Rule 29.17. Additionally, CBOE represents that it, and the Options Price Reporting Authority (“OPRA”), have the necessary systems capacity to handle the additional quote volume anticipated to be associated with credit default basket options. 21 *See* proposed CBOE Rule 29.11. 22 *See* proposed CBOE Rules 29.11-29.15, 29.16, and 29.19. 23 OCC Rule 805 sets forth the expiration date exercise procedures for options cleared and settled by the OCC. 24 *See* Chapter VIII of CBOE's rules. Once a particular credit default basket option class has been approved for listing and trading, the Exchange would, from time to time, open for trading a series of that class. If a credit default option class initially approved for trading no longer meets the Exchange's requirements for continued approval, the Exchange would not open for trading any additional series of options and, as provided in CBOE Rule 5.4, could prohibit any opening purchase transactions in such class. The proposed trading rules for credit default basket options are designed to create an environment that takes into account the small number of transactions likely to occur, while providing price improvement and the transparency benefits of competitive floor bidding, as compared to the over-the-counter (“OTC”) market. Upon the confirmation of the first credit event (in the case of a single payout credit default basket option), a credit event in every Basket Component (in the case of a multiple payout credit default basket option), or the redemption of all Relevant Obligations (in the case of either type of credit default basket option), the applicable credit default basket option class would cease trading. In addition, CBOE's trading halt procedures applicable to equity options would apply to credit default basket options. 25 When determining whether to institute a trading halt in credit default basket options, CBOE floor officials would consider whether current quotations for a Relevant Obligation or other securities of a Reference Entity are unavailable or have become unreliable. 26 The Exchange's board of directors would also have the power to impose restrictions on transactions or exercises in one or more series of credit default basket options as the board, in its judgment, determines advisable in the interests of maintaining a fair and orderly market or otherwise deems advisable in the public interest or for the protection of investors. 27 25 *See* CBOE Rules 6.3 and 6.3B; proposed CBOE Rule 29.13. 26 *See id.* 27 *See* proposed CBOE Rule 29.8. D. Clearance and Settlement Like credit default options, credit default basket options do not have an exercise price, and thus by their terms, do not meet the definition of “standardized options” for purposes of Rule 9b-1 under the Act. 28 However, as discussed herein, the Commission today is using its authority pursuant to Rule 9b-1 to designate credit default basket options as “standardized options” under Rule 9b-1. Consequently, credit default basket option transactions will be eligible for clearance and settlement by the OCC in accordance with procedures that are substantially similar to existing systems and procedures for the clearance and settlement of exchange-traded options. 29 28 17 CFR 240.9b-1. 29 On April 20, 2007, the OCC filed with the Commission, a proposed rule change to enable it to clear and settle credit default basket options proposed to be listed by CBOE. On June 14, 2007, the OCC filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposal. The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on June 27, 2007. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55939 (June 21, 2007), 72 FR 35291 (SR-OCC-2007-06) (the “OCC Proposal”). The Commission has not yet taken action on the OCC proposal. The Commission also notes that the Options Disclosure Document (“ODD”) was recently amended to incorporate disclosure related to both credit default options and credit default basket options. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55921 (June 18, 2007), 72 FR 34495 (June 22, 2007) (SR-ODD-2007-03). E. Adjustments Like credit default options, both types of credit default basket options would be subject to adjustments in two circumstances. 30 First, if a Basket Component is succeeded by another entity in accordance with the terms of the underlying debt securities, the Exchange will specify a new recovery rate and basket weight for each successor Basket Component. The newly specified weights would equal the weight of the original Basket Component. To the extent necessary and appropriate for the protection of investors and the public interest, all other terms and conditions of the options would be the same as the original credit default basket options. 30 *See* CBOE proposed Rule 29.4. Second, if the Reference Obligation of a Basket Component is redeemed or matures during the life of the credit default basket option, the Exchange would specify another debt security of the Reference Entity as the new Reference Obligation for that Basket Component. If all debt securities of a Basket Component ( *i.e.* , all Relevant Obligations) are redeemed during the life of the credit default basket option, that Basket Component would be removed from the basket. F. Position Limits Pursuant to proposed CBOE Rule 29.5, credit default basket options would be subject to a position limit equal to 50,000 contracts on the same side of the market. Credit default basket options would not be aggregated with option contracts on the same underlying security and would not be subject to the hedge exemption to CBOE's standard position limits. Instead, the following hedge strategies and positions would be exempt from CBOE's position limits:

(i)A credit default basket option position “hedged” or “covered” by an appropriate amount of cash to meet the cash settlement amount obligation; and

(ii)a credit default basket option position “hedged” or “covered” by an amount of any of the Basket Component's debt securities, instruments, or interests sufficient to meet:

(A)In the case of a single payout credit default option, the cash settlement amount obligation that would be the greatest if any of the Basket Components of that option were to experience a credit event; or

(B)in the case of a multiple payout credit default option, the sum of the sum of each Basket Component's cash settlement amount. 31 Also, CBOE's market-maker and firm facilitation exemptions to position limits would apply. 32 31 *See* proposed CBOE Rule 29.5. 32 Proposed CBOE Rule 29.5 would require that for purposes of its market-maker hedge exemption (CBOE Rule 4.11.05) the position must be within 20% of the applicable limit before an exemption would be granted. With respect to CBOE's firm facilitation exemption (CBOE Rule 4.11.06), proposed CBOE Rule 29.5 would provide that the aggregate exemption position could not exceed three times the standard limit of 50,000 contracts. G. Margin The margin (both initial and maintenance) required for writing short and long positions in credit default basket options would be as follows: • For a qualified customer carrying a long position in a credit default basket option, the margin requirement would be 15% of the current market value of the credit default basket option. • For a non-qualified customer carrying a long position in a credit default basket option, the margin requirement would be 100% of the current market value of the credit default basket option. • For a qualified customer carrying a short position in a multiple payout credit default basket option, the margin requirement would be the lesser of the current market value of the credit default basket option plus 15% of the sum of each Basket Component's cash settlement amount, or the sum of each Basket Component's cash settlement amount. • For a non-qualified customer carrying a short position in a multiple payout credit default basket option, the margin requirement would be the sum of each Basket Component's cash settlement amount. • For a qualified customer carrying a short position in a single payout credit default basket option, the margin requirement would be the lesser of the current market value of the credit default basket option plus 15% of the cash settlement amount of the Basket Component that would be the greatest if any of the Basket Components were to experience a credit event, or the cash settlement amount of the Basket Component that would be the greatest if any of the Basket Components were to experience a credit event. • For a non-qualified customer carrying a short position in a single payout credit default basket option, the margin requirement would be the cash settlement amount of the Basket Component that would be the greatest if any of the Basket Components were to experience a credit event. These requirements may be satisfied by a deposit of cash or marginable securities. A credit default option carried short in a customer's account would be deemed a covered position, and eligible for the cash account, provided any one of the following is held in the account at the time the option is written or is received into the account promptly thereafter:

(i)For multiple payout credit default basket options, cash or cash equivalents equal to 100% of the sum of each Basket Component's cash settlement amount;

(ii)for single payout credit default basket options, cash or cash equivalents equal to 100% of the cash settlement amount of the Basket Component that would be the greatest if any of the Basket Components were to experience a credit event; or

(iii)an escrow agreement. The Exchange believes that these requirements strike the appropriate balance and adequately address concerns that a member or its customer may try to maintain an inordinately large unhedged position in credit default options. The Exchange represents that, in accordance with proposed CBOE Rule 12.3(a)(4), an escrow agreement must be issued in a form acceptable to the Exchange, and that it has traditionally recognized as acceptable the escrow agreement forms of the OCC and the New York Stock Exchange. Lastly, pursuant to proposed CBOE Rule 12.5, a credit default basket option that is carried for the account of a qualified customer may be deemed to have market value for the purposes of CBOE Rule 12.3(c). H. Surveillance The Exchange has represented that it will have in place adequate surveillance procedures to monitor trading in credit default basket options prior to listing and trading such options. III. Discussion The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. 33 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 34 which requires, among other things, that the rules of an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices; to promote just and equitable principles of trade; to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, 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. CBOE's proposal, by enabling it to list and trade securities heretofore existing only in the OTC market, would extend to investors the benefits of a listed exchange market, which include: a centralized market center; an auction market with posted, transparent market quotations and transaction reporting; standardized contract specifications; and the guarantee of the OCC. 33 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). 34 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). In connection with its earlier approval of credit default options, the Commission found that the credit default options proposed by CBOE are securities because they are options based on the value of a security or securities and because they are options on an interest in, or based on the value of an interest in, a security or securities. 35 Under an analysis similar to that applied to credit default options, and after careful consideration of the terms of the two types of credit default basket options, the Commission finds that the credit default basket options proposed by CBOE are securities. Specifically, the Commission finds that credit default basket options are options based on the value of securities or a group or index of securities and are options on an interest in or based on the value of an interest in, securities or a group or index of securities and, therefore, are securities under section 3(a)(10) of the Act. 36 35 *See* Credit Default Option Approval Order, *supra* note 7. 36 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(10). As a threshold matter, the Commission finds that credit default basket options are options, not futures contracts. Generally speaking an option grants the holder the right, but not the obligation, to buy or sell a specific quantity, at a specific price, on or before a specified future date. 37 Courts have highlighted three characteristics in particular that distinguish options from futures contracts:

(i)An options-buyer pays to the seller a nonrefundable premium;

(ii)an options-buyer has rights but no further obligations under the contract; and

(iii)an options-seller bears all the risk exposure. 38 Examining credit default basket options in light of these characteristics, it is clear that credit default basket options are options. First, the buyer of a credit default basket option pays to the seller a nonrefundable premium. Second, the buyer of a credit default basket option has rights but no further obligations under the contract. Third, the buyer of a credit default basket option has no further risk exposure under the contract and the seller bears all the risk of the credit event occurring. 37 *See British American Commodity Options v. Bagley,* 552 F.2d 482, 484-85 (2d Cir. 1977). 38 *See CFTC* v. *U.S. Metals Depository Co.,* 468 F.Supp. 1149, 1154 (S.D.N.Y. 1979); and *United States* v. *Bein,* 728 F.2d 107, 112 (2d Cir. 1984). Although credit default basket options differ from classic options in certain respects, these differences do not affect the economic substance of the contract. First, credit default basket options are cash-settled and do not allow for physical delivery. It is well established, however, that cash-settled options based on prices of securities are options “on” such securities. 39 Second, credit default basket options are automatically exercised, unlike a classic option that generally gives the option-holder the right but not the obligation to exercise if the option is in the money. In the case of cash-settled options, such as credit default basket options, however, giving the option-holder the right to decline to accept the cash upon the occurrence of an event of default would be economically meaningless. 40 For this reason, under OCC rules, index option contracts are automatically exercised if they are in-the-money at expiration, and equity options contracts are automatically exercised if they are in-the-money by specified amounts. Third, the payout for a credit default basket option is fixed in advance and binary in nature, while in a classic option the payout can increase or decrease continuously in direct correlation with the price movement of the underlying instrument. The same is true, of course, of the payout of a futures contract. Thus, the fixed payout of credit default basket options does not weigh in favor of classifying them as either futures or options. 39 *See Caiola* v. *Citibank, N.A., New York,* 295 F.3d 312, 326 (2d Cir. 2002). 40 *See Stechler* v. *Sidley, Austin Brown & Wood, L.L.P.,* 382 F.Supp.2d 580, 595-97 (S.D.N.Y. 2005). In short, even though the potential payout of a credit default basket option is cash-settled, automatically exercised, and fixed in advance, the buyer of a credit default basket option still pays a fixed premium for the possibility of receiving a greater amount—which is the essence of optionality. 41 41 *See* Brief of Amicus Curiae The Securities and Exchange Commission, at 24, *Caiola* v. *Citibank, N.A., New York,* 295 F.3d 312 (2d Cir. 2002) (01-7545) (“Simply put, Caiola paid a little for the chance to get a lot”). Furthermore, the Commission finds that credit default basket options are securities under section 3(a)(10) of the Act. 42 Specifically, credit default basket options are options based on the value of securities or a group or index of securities and are options on an interest in, or based on the value of an interest in, securities or a group or index of securities. In coming to these conclusions, the Commission carefully considered the terms of the credit default basket options, using an analytical approach similar to that which the Commission applied to credit default options. 42 The Commission wishes to make clear that because credit default basket options will be exchange-traded and not individually negotiated (and not necessarily between eligible contract participants), they are not qualifying swap agreements under Section 206A of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (“GLBA”), 15 U.S.C. 78c note, and, therefore, not excluded from the definition of security by Section 3A of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78c-1. Also, certain OTC credit default swaps (whether single-name or basket) are not securities. The finding that credit default basket options are securities because they are options based on the value of securities or a group or index of securities might suggest that single-name or basket OTC credit default swaps are also options based on the value of a security or group or index of securities and, therefore, excluded from the definition of swap agreement because Section 206A(b)(1) of the GLBA, 15 U.S.C. 78c note, excludes from the definition of swap agreement “any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege on any security, certificate of deposit, or group or index of securities, including any interest therein or based on the value thereof.” However, Congress specifically enumerated “credit default swaps” (without defining the term) as one example of a qualifying swap agreement. *See* Section 206A(a)(3) of the GLBA, 15 U.S.C. 78c note. The Commission views the specific enumeration of “credit default swaps” as reflecting the intention of Congress to exclude certain OTC credit default swaps from the definition of security pursuant to Sections 206B & C of the GLBA, 15 U.S.C. 78c note. Of course, OTC credit default swaps that involve terms similar to credit default basket options, but that are otherwise excluded from the definition of security because they are qualifying swap agreements, remain subject to the Commission's antifraud jurisdiction (including authority over insider trading) as “security-based swap agreements” under Section 206B of the GLBA, 15 U.S.C. 78c note. The Commission also believes that the listing and trading rules proposed by CBOE for credit default basket options are substantially similar to the listing and trading rules for credit default options, and are likewise reasonable and consistent with the Act. As with a credit default option, a credit default basket option must be based on Reference Obligations issued by entities that issue or guarantee registered equity securities that are NMS stocks and that meet the Exchange's standards for listing an equity option. These requirements are reasonably designed to facilitate investors' access to information about the Reference Entities that may be necessary to price a credit default basket option appropriately. The Commission believes that the proposed position limits and margin rules for credit default basket options are reasonable and consistent with the Act. The proposed position limit of 50,000 contracts in any credit default basket option class appears to reasonably balance the promotion of a free and open market for these securities with minimization of incentives for market manipulation and insider trading. The proposed margin rules appear reasonably designed to deter a member or its customer from assuming an imprudent position in credit default options. In support of this proposal, the Exchange made the following representations: • The Exchange will have in place adequate surveillance procedures to monitor trading in credit default basket options prior to listing and trading such options, thereby helping to ensure the maintenance of a fair and orderly market for trading in credit default options. • The Exchange and the OPRA will have the necessary systems capacity to accommodate the additional volume associated with credit default basket options as proposed. This approval order is based on CBOE's representations. For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed rule is consistent with the Act. IV. Designation of Credit Default Basket Options Pursuant to Rule 9b-1 Rule 9b-1 establishes a disclosure framework for standardized options that are traded on a national securities exchange and cleared through a registered clearing agency. Under this framework, the exchange on which a standardized option is listed and traded must prepare an ODD that, among other things, identifies the issuer and describes the uses, mechanics, and risks of options trading, in language that can be easily understood by the general investing public. The ODD is treated as a substitute for the traditional prospectus. A broker-dealer must provide a copy of the ODD to each customer at or before approving of the customer's account for trading any standardized option. 43 Any amendment to the ODD must be distributed to each customer whose account is approved for trading the options class for which the ODD relates. 44 43 *See* 17 CFR 240.9b-1(d)(1). 44 *See* 17 CFR 240.9b-1(d)(2). Under Rule 9b-1, use of the ODD is limited to “standardized options” for which there is an effective registration statement on Form S-20 under the Securities Act or that are exempt from registration. 45 The Commission specifically reserved in Rule 9b-1 the ability to designate as standardized options other securities “that the Commission believes should be included within the options disclosure framework.” 46 45 *See* 17 CFR 240.9b-1(b)(1) and (c)(8). *See also* 17 CFR 230.238. Rule 238 under the Securities Act provides an exemption from the Securities Act for any standardized option, as defined by Rule 9b-1(a)(4) under the Act, with limited exceptions. Rule 238 does not exempt standardized options from the antifraud provisions of Section 17 of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. 77q. Also, offers and sales of standardized options by or on behalf of the issuer of the underlying security or securities, an affiliate of the issuer, or an underwriter, will constitute an offer or sale of the underlying security or securities as defined in Section 2(a)(3) of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. 77b(a)(3). *See also* Securities Act Release No. 8171 (December 23, 2002), 68 FR 188 (January 2, 2003) (Exemption for Standardized Options From Provisions of the Securities Act of 1933 and From Registration Requirements of the Exchange Act of 1934). 46 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 19055 and Securities Act Release No. 6426 (September 16, 1982), 47 FR 41950, 41954 (September 23, 1982). The Commission hereby designates credit default basket options, as defined in the OCC Proposal, 47 as standardized options for purposes of Rule 9b-1 under the Act. Like credit default options, credit default basket options do not meet the definition of “standardized options,” because they do not have an exercise price. 48 However, they resemble standardized options in other significant respects. Credit default basket options have underlying securities and an expiration date. Like other standardized options, credit default basket options have standardized terms relating to exercise procedures, contract adjustments, time of issuance, effect of closing transactions, restrictions, and other matters pertaining to the rights and obligations of holders and writers. Further, credit default basket options are designed to provide market participants with the ability to hedge their exposure to underlying securities. The fact that credit default basket options lack a specified exercise price does not detract from this option-like benefit. The Commission believes that the fact that the OCC, the clearing agency for all standardized options, is willing to serve as issuer of credit default basket options supports the view that adding credit default basket options to the standardized option disclosure framework is reasonable. 47 For purposes of its proposal, OCC would define the term “credit default basket option” as an option that is based on a basket comprised of at least two reference entities and that is either a “multiple payout credit default basket option” or a “single payout credit default basket option.” A “multiple payout credit default basket option” would mean a credit default basket option that automatically pays an exercise settlement amount each time a credit event is confirmed with respect to any one of the reference entities prior to expiration of the option. A “single payout credit default basket option” would be automatically exercised and pay a single exercise settlement amount only when the first credit event is confirmed with respect to a reference entity prior to expiration of the option. *See* proposed Section 1.C.(2) of Article XIV of the OCC By-Laws. “Credit event” would be as defined in the rules of the exchange on which the credit default basket options are listed, with respect to a reference obligation for such option. *See* proposed Section 1.C.(3) of Article XIV of the OCC By-Laws. “Reference entity” would mean any one of the issuers or guarantors of the reference obligation(s) that underlie a credit default basket option. *See* proposed Section 1.R.(1) of Article XIV of the OCC By-Laws. “Reference obligation” would mean any debt security the terms of which are used to define the occurrence of a credit event with respect to the reference entity that is its issuer or guarantor for a class of credit default basket options, as provided in the rules of the listing exchange. *See id* . 48 *See* Credit Default Options Approval Order at Section VI (designating credit default options as standardized options for purposes of Rule 9b-1 under the Act). Therefore, the Commission hereby designates credit default basket options, such as those proposed by CBOE, as standardized options for purposes of Rule 9b-1 under the Act. V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 49 that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2007-26), as modified by Amendment No. 3, be and hereby is approved. 49 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). *It is further ordered* , pursuant to Rule 9b-1(a)(4) under the Act, that credit default basket options, as defined in proposed rule change SR-OCC-2007-06, are designated as standardized options. By the Commission. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-16587 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56265; File No. SR-FINRA-2007-002] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend a Pilot Program That Increases Position and Exercise Limits for Certain Equity Options August 15, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on July 31, 2007, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) (f/k/a the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”)) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by FINRA. FINRA has filed the proposal as 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 it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change FINRA proposes to amend Rule 2860 to extend a pilot program increasing certain options position and exercise limits. The text of the proposed rule change is available at FINRA, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.finra.org.* II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, FINRA 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. FINRA 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 FINRA proposes to amend Rule 2860 to extend a pilot program until March 1, 2008 (unless extended) increasing position and exercise limits for both standardized and conventional options (“Pilot Program”). 5 Unless extended, the Pilot Program will expire on September 1, 2007. 6 FINRA believes that the Pilot Program should be extended so that it may continue without interruption for the same reasons that are discussed in the Pilot Program Notice. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51520 (April 11, 2005), 70 FR 19977 (April 15, 2005) (SR-NASD-2005-040) (“Pilot Program Notice”). 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55225 (February 1, 2007), 72 FR 6634 (February 12, 2007) (SR-NASD-2007-007). 2. Statutory Basis FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, 7 which requires, among other things, that FINRA's rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The proposed rule change is being made so that the Pilot Program, which achieves these goals as discussed in the Pilot Program Notice, may continue without interruption. 7 15 U.S.C. 78 *o* -3(b)(6). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition FINRA 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:

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

(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and

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

(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)become operative for 30 days after the date of filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 9 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder. 10 As required under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), 11 the ISE provided the Commission with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of the filing of the proposed rule change. 12 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 12 The Exchange initially filed this proposal in SR-ISE-2007-63. The Exchange withdrew that proposal and subsequently filed the present proposal pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 13 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 14 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The ISE requests that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay, as specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), 15 which would make the rule change effective and operative upon filing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Commission notes that this proposal is substantially similar to SR-CBOE-2006-88 16 previously approved by the Commission for the CBOE. The Commission further notes that the CBOE proposal was noticed for comment and no comments were received. Accordingly, the Commission designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing with the Commission. 17 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 14 *Id.* 15 *Id.* 16 *See supra* note 7. 17 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the impact of the proposed rule on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 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 the furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-ISE-2007-70 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-2007-70. 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 the ISE. 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-2007-70 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 18 18 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-16524 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56263; File No. SR-ISE-2007-69] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Extension of a Pilot Period To Increase Position Limits and Exercise Limits for Equity Options and Options on the Nasdaq-100 Tracking Stock August 15, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on August 13, 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 ISE. The Exchange has filed the proposal as 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 it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change ISE proposes to extend the time period for Exchange Rule 412 and Rule 414 position and exercise limits pilot program for equity option contracts and options on the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock (“QQQQ”) (“Pilot Program”). The text of the proposed rule change is available at ISE, 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, ISE included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Pilot Program provides for an increase to the standard position and exercise limits for equity option contracts and for options on QQQQs. 5 The Pilot Program, after being extended on prior occasions, 6 is set to expire on September 1, 2007. 7 Specifically, the Pilot Program increased the applicable position and exercise limits for equity options and options on the QQQQ to the following levels: Current equity option contract limit 8 Pilot program equity option contract limit 13,500 25,000 22,500 50,000 31,500 75,000 60,000 200,000 75,000 250,000 Current QQQQ option contract limit Pilot program QQQQ option contract limit 300,000 900,000 The purpose of the proposed rule change is to extend the Pilot Program for an additional six-month period, until March 1, 2008. The Exchange believes that extending the Pilot Program for this additional period is warranted due to the positive feedback from members and for the reasons cited in the original rule filing that proposed the adoption of the Pilot Program. 9 Additionally, the Exchange represents that it has not experienced any problems or difficulties relating to the Pilot Program since its inception. For these reasons, the Exchange requests that the Commission extend the Pilot Program until March 1, 2008. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51295 (March 2, 2005), 70 FR 11292 (March 8, 2005) (SR-ISE-2005-14) (“Pilot Program Notice”). 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 54335 (August 18, 2006), 71 FR 50954 (August 28, 2006) (SR-ISE-2006-47); 53345 (February 22, 2006), 71 FR 10579 (March 1, 2006) (SR-ISE-2006-10); and 52265 (August 15, 2005), 70 FR 48996 (August 22, 2005) (SR-ISE-2005-39). 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55311 (February 16, 2007), 72 FR 8408 (February 26, 2007) (SR-ISE-2007-15). 8 Except when the Pilot Program is in effect. 9 *See* Pilot Program Notice, *supra* note 5. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 10 in general, and furthers the objective of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 11 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors and the public interest. 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested parties. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the forgoing rule change does not:

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

(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(3)become operative for 30 days after the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 12 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 13 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 14 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 15 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest because it will allow the Pilot Program to continue uninterrupted. For this reason, the Commission designates that the proposed rule change become operative immediately. 16 14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. ISE has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement. 15 *Id.* 16 For the purposes only of waiving the operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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 Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-ISE-2007-69 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-ISE-2007-69. 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 will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of ISE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-ISE-2007-69 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 17 17 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-16527 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56271; File No. SR-NYSE-2007-74] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Sections 703.22 and 802.01D of the Exchange's Listed Company Manual Regarding the Listing and Trading of Index-Linked Securities August 16, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 3 notice is hereby given that on August 3, 2007, New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule changes as described in Items I and II below, which items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule changes from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. 3 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 amend Section 703.22 of its Listed Company Manual (“Manual”) to permit the listing of securities that do not meet the one million unit initial distribution requirement but are redeemable on at least a weekly basis at the option of the holders. The filing also amends Section 802.01D of the Manual to apply the continued listing standards under the heading “Specialized Securities” to securities listed under Section 703.22. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.nyse.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 NYSE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange proposes to amend Section 703.22 of the Manual to permit the listing of securities that do not meet the one million unit initial distribution requirement but are redeemable on at least a weekly basis at the option of the holders. Section 703.22 is the Exchange's 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, “Index-Linked Securities”). Section 703.22 of the Manual currently exempts a new listing of Index-Linked Securities from the otherwise applicable requirement that the issue have 400 holders upon listing, but only if the issue provides for the redemption of securities at the option of the holders on at least a weekly basis. The Exchange believes that, where there is such a weekly redemption right, the same justification exists for an exemption from the requirement to have one million units issued at the time of listing as applies to the 400 holder requirement. 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 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 those Index-Linked Securities with a weekly redemption feature that are currently listed, as well as all of those that are currently proposed to be listed, 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. The Exchange believes that 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 Exchange states that the ability to list Index-Linked Securities with these characteristics without any minimum 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 a specific number of units on the listing date. However, the Exchange believes that this difficulty in ensuring the sale of one million units on the listing date is not indicative of a likely long-term lack of liquidity in the securities or, for the reasons set forth in the prior paragraph, of a difficulty in establishing a pricing equilibrium in the securities or a successful two-sided market. The Exchange also proposes to amend Section 802.01D of the Manual to apply the continued listing standards under the heading “Specialized Securities” to securities listed under Section 703.22. These continued listing standards require that the securities be delisted when: • The number of publicly-held securities is less than 100,000. • The number of holders is less than 100. • The aggregate market value of securities outstanding is less than $1,000,000. • For specialized securities that are debt, the issuer is not able to meet its obligations on such debt. The Exchange proposes to exempt from the 100 holders requirement Index-Linked Securities that are redeemable at the option of the holder on at least a weekly basis. The Exchange believes this exemption is appropriate because the securities in question are not subject to any minimum holder requirement at the time of initial listing. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 4 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 5 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. 4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. 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 e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2007-74 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-74. 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 the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File number SR-NYSE-2007-74 and should be submitted by September 12, 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 is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange 6 and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6 of the Act. 7 Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 8 which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange 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. 6 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The Commission believes that this proposal should benefit investors by providing an exception to the minimum public distribution requirements for Index-Linked Securities with a weekly redemption right. The Commission believes that the market price of Index-Linked Securities with a weekly redemption right should exhibit a strong correlation to the performance of the relevant underlying index, since holders of such securities will be unlikely to sell them for less than their redemption value if they have a weekly right to be redeemed for their full value. The Commission believes that this exception is reasonable and should allow for the listing and trading of certain Index-Linked Securities that would otherwise not be able to be listed and traded on the Exchange. The Commission further finds that the Exchange's proposal to amend Section 802.01D of the Manual to apply the continued listing standards under the heading “Specialized Securities” to securities listed under Section 703.22 will clarify the applicable continued listing criteria for Index-Linked Securities. Moreover, the Commission believes that the proposed exemption for Index-Linked Securities that are redeemable at the option of the holder on at least a weekly basis from an ongoing distribution requirement is consistent with the rationale underlying the exemption from the initial listing standards in Section 703.22 of the Manual. The Commission finds good cause for approving the proposed rule change prior to the 30th day after the date of publication of the notice of filing thereof in the **Federal Register** . The Commission does not believe that NYSE's proposal raises any novel regulatory issues and, therefore, that good cause exists for approving the filing on an expedited basis. Therefore, accelerating approval of this proposal should benefit investors by creating, without undue delay, additional competition in the market for such securities. Therefore, the Commission finds good cause, consistent with Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 9 to approve the proposed rule change on an accelerated basis. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 10 that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2007-74) be, and it hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis. 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). [FR Doc. E7-16555 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56270; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-74] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSEArca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 7.34(e) and Clarifying Certain Customer Disclosures Relating to ETF Trading August 15, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on August 13, 2007, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the “NYSEArca” or the “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 NYSEArca. The Exchange has filed 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)(ii) 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)(ii). 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, through its wholly owned subsidiary, NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. (“NYSE Arca Equities” or “Corporation”), proposes to amend NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.34(e) (the “Rule”). The changes described in this rule proposal clarify the customer disclosures ETP Holders must make to non-ETP Holders. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.nysearca.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 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 Pursuant to the Rule, ETP Holders may not accept orders from Non-ETP Holders for execution in the Opening or Late Trading Sessions without first disclosing certain risks. To facilitate extended hours trading and enhance customer disclosures, the Exchange proposes to require ETP Holders to disclose to their Non-ETP Holder customers an additional risk associated with extended trading hours in exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”). 5 5 ETFs include securities described in NYSE Arca Equities Rules 5.1(b)(13), 5.2(j)(3), 5.2(j)(6), 8.100, 8.200, 8.201, 8.202, 8.203, 8.300, and 8.400, which relate to Unit Investment Trusts, Investment Company Units, Index-Linked Securities, Portfolio Depositary Receipts, Trust Issued Receipts, Commodity-Based Trust Shares, Currency Trust Shares, Commodity Index Trust Shares, Partnership Units, and Paired Trust Securities, respectively. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.34(e)(3) and 7.34(e)(3)(7) by addressing the risk associated with the lack of calculation or dissemination of the underlying index value or Intraday Indicative Value (“IIV”). For ETFs, an updated underlying index value or IIV may not be calculated or publicly disseminated in extended trading hours. Since the underlying index value and IIV are not calculated or widely disseminated during the Opening and Late Trading Sessions, an investor who is unable to calculate implied values for certain derivative securities products in those sessions may be at a disadvantage to market professionals. The Exchange believes that requiring ETP Holders to disclose this risk to Non-ETP Holders will facilitate informed participation in extended hours trading. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 6 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 7 in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system. 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change constitutes a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of the Exchange, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 8 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder. 9 At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such proposed 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. 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 9 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-NYSEArca-2007-74 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-NYSEArca-2007-74. 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 the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-74 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 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. E7-16580 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56264; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-84] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Position and Exercise Limit Pilot Program August 15, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on August 3, 2007, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca” 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. The Exchange has filed the proposal as 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 it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change NYSE Arca proposes to extend the position and exercise limits pilot program for equity option contracts and options on the Nasdaq-100 Tracking Stock (“QQQQ”) (“Pilot Program”) through March 1, 2008. The text of the proposed rule change is available at NYSE Arca, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.nysearca.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, NYSE Arca included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. NYSE Arca 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 purpose of this proposal is to extend the period for the Exchange's Pilot Program relating to standard position and exercise limits for equity option contracts and for options on QQQQs until March 1, 2008. 5 Specifically, the Pilot Program increased the applicable position and exercise limits for equity options and options on the QQQQ in accordance with the following levels: 5 The Pilot Program, which was effective upon filing on February 25, 2005 and subsequently extended, is due to expire on September 1, 2007. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51286 (March 1, 2005), 70 FR 11297 (March 8, 2005) (SR-PCX-2003-55) (“Pilot Program Notice”). *See also* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 55374 (February 26, 2007), 72 FR 9823 (March 5, 2007) (SR-NYSEArca-19); 54385 (August 30, 2006), 71 FR 53150 (September 8, 2006) (SR-NYSEArca-49); 53350 (February 22, 2006), 71 FR 10582 (March 1, 2006) (SR-PCX-2006-08); and 52263 (August 15, 2005), 70 FR 49003 (August 22, 2005) (SR-PCX-2005-95). 6 Except when the Pilot Program is in effect. Current equity option contract limit 6 Pilot program equity option contract limit 13,500 25,000 22,500 50,000 31,500 75,000 60,000 200,000 75,000 250,000 Current QQQQ option contract limit Pilot Program QQQQ Option Contract Limit 300,000 900,000 The Exchange believes that extending the Pilot Program until March 1, 2008 is warranted due to the positive feedback from OTP Holders and for the reasons cited in the original rule filing that proposed the Pilot Program. 7 The Exchange has not encountered any problems or difficulties relating to the Pilot Program since its inception. For these reasons, the Exchange requests that the Commission extend the Pilot Program until March 1, 2008. 7 *See* Pilot Program Notice, *supra* note 5. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. 8 Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 9 that 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 perfect the mechanism for a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments on the proposed rule change 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:

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

(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(3)become operative for 30 days from the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 10 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 11 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 12 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 13 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest because it will allow the Pilot Program to continue uninterrupted. For this reason, the Commission designates that the proposed rule change become operative immediately. 14 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. NYSE Arca has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement. 13 *Id.* 14 For purposes only of waiving the operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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 Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-84 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-84. 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 will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of NYSE Arca. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-84 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-16528 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56261; File No. SR-Phlx-2007-51] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to an Increase in the Maximum Number of Quoters Permitted in an Option August 15, 2007. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on August 13, 2007, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Phlx” 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 prepared by the Phlx. The Exchange filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act, 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 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 The Phlx proposes to amend Commentary .02 of Rule 507, Application for Approval as an SQT 5 or RSQT 6 and Assignment in Options, to increase the maximum number of participants that may be assigned in a particular equity option at any one time. 5 An SQT is an Exchange Registered Options Trader (“ROT”) who has received permission from the Exchange to generate and submit options quotations electronically through AUTOM in eligible options to which such SQT is assigned. An SQT may only submit such quotations while such SQT is physically present on the floor of the Exchange. *See* Exchange Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A). 6 An RSQT is a ROT that is a member or member organization with no physical trading floor presence who has received permission from the Exchange to generate and submit option quotations electronically through AUTOM in eligible options to which such RSQT has been assigned. An RSQT may only submit such quotations electronically from off the floor of the Exchange. *See* Exchange Rule 1014(b)(ii)(B). The Exchange also proposes a technical amendment to Rule 507, Commentary .01, to re-insert language concerning assignment in options by “root symbol” that was inadvertently deleted in the original proposal relating to the Maximum Number of Quoters (“MNQ”) in Equity Options, as described more fully below. The text of the proposed rule change is available at *http://www.phlx.com,* at the Phlx, 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 Phlx included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Phlx 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 purpose of the proposed rule change is to permit additional participants to quote electronically in equity options listed for trading on the Exchange by increasing the MNQ in equity options trading on the Exchange. In January 2007, as one part of a larger overall program established to mitigate electronic option quote traffic on the Exchange, the Exchange adopted Commentary .02 to Rule 507, Maximum Number of Quoters in Equity Options. 7 This rule limits the number of participants that may be assigned to a particular equity option at any one time based upon each option's monthly national volume. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55114 (January 17, 2007), 72 FR 3185 (January 24, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2006-81). Commentary .02 to Rule 507 currently sets forth tiered MNQ levels providing for 20 participants for the top 5% most actively traded options; 15 participants for next 10% most actively traded options, and 10 market participants for all other options. The ranking is based upon the preceding month's national volumes. The proposal would increase the MNQ levels by two

(2)participants in each tier. Specifically, the new MNQ levels would provide for increases from 20 to 22 participants per option for the top 5% most actively traded options; from 15 to 17 participants per option for the next 10% most actively traded options, and from 10 to 12 participants per option for all other options. Currently, the Exchange's Options Allocation, Evaluation and Securities Committee (“OAESC”) 8 may increase the MNQ when exceptional circumstances warrant. Proposed Commentary .04 to Rule 507 describes the events that may be considered “exceptional,” including substantial trading volume (whether actual or expected), a major news event or corporate event. The Exchange may reduce the MNQ following the cessation of the exceptional circumstances, but the Exchange must follow the procedures for decreases to the MNQ outlined in Commentary .03 of the rule. When relying on this provision, as in the instant proposal, the Exchange must submit a rule filing to the Commission pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act. 8 The OAESC has jurisdiction over, among other things: The appointment of specialists on the options and foreign currency options trading floors; allocation, retention and transfer of privileges to deal in options on the trading floors; and administration of the 500 series of Phlx rules. *See* Phlx By-Law Article X, Section 10-7. Initially, the Exchange set the MNQ at a very conservative level to ensure there was ample capacity to support multiple participants quoting the same equity option. Since that time, the Exchange has experienced an increase in volume, particularly in options included in the top two MNQ levels. The Exchange believes that adding two additional positions to the top tier ( *i.e.* , options that represent the top 5% in national volume) should attract quality liquidity providers and should enable the Exchange to be flexible in assigning top tier options to such liquidity providers. The Exchange also believes that adding two new positions to the second and third tier should add to the Exchange's liquidity by providing opportunities for additional ROTs to trade in such issues. 9 9 The Exchange notes that there is substantial interest among ROTs in trading such issues. After careful analysis, the Exchange believes it has the capacity to increase the MNQ as proposed. The Exchange believes that the effect of an increase in the MNQ fosters competition in that it increases the number of market participants that may quote electronically in a product. The Exchange will inform market participants of changes to the MNQ via Exchange circular. Assignment by “Root Symbol” In late December, 2006, the Commission approved the Exchange's proposal to adopt Commentary .01 to Rule 507 to permit the Exchange to assign trading privileges to SQTs and RSQTs, upon their request, only in specific series of a particular option based on the “root symbol” of the series, instead of assigning trading privileges in all series of such option. 10 Thereafter, the Exchange filed its MNQ proposal, reserving the numerical position for Commentary .01 and adding the MNQ language in the subsequent Commentaries. Because the MNQ proposal was approved after the “root symbol” proposal, the effect of marking commentary .01 “RESERVED” was to delete the “root symbol” language. The Exchange proposes herein to correct this inadvertent deletion by re-inserting the “root symbol” language into Commentary .01. 10 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55027 (December 29, 2006), 72 FR 1358 (January 11, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2006-53). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act 11 in general, and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(5) of the Act 12 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest, by permitting more participants to quote electronically on the Exchange, fostering competition, and adding liquidity to the Exchange's markets, which should benefit customers. 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others No written comments were either solicited or received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The proposed rule change is designated by the Exchange as a “non-controversial” rule pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) 13 of the Act and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 14 because the proposed rule change:

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

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

(3)does not become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, provided that the Exchange has given the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the filing of the proposed rule change. 15 Consequently, the proposed rule change has become effective upon filing. 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 15 As required under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange has provided the Commission with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the filing date of this proposal. 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-Phlx-2007-51 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-Phlx-2007-51. 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 the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Phlx. 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-Phlx-2007-51 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 16 16 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-16525 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56267; File No. SR-Phlx-2007-58] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Extension of the Position Limits Pilot Program August 15, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on August 13, 2007, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Phlx” 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 Phlx. The Exchange has filed the proposal as 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 it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Phlx proposes to extend an existing pilot program applicable to Exchange Rule 1001, Position Limits, which increases the standard position and exercise limits for equity option contracts, including options on the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock 5 (“QQQQ”) (“Pilot Program”). The Exchange proposes to extend the Pilot Program through March 1, 2008. The text of the proposed rule change is available at Phlx, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.phlx.com.* 5 The Nasdaq-100®, Nasdaq-100 Index®, Nasdaq®, The Nasdaq Stock Market®, Nasdaq-100 Shares SM , Nasdaq-100 Trust SM , Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock SM , and QQQ SM are trademarks or service marks of The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”) and have been licensed for use for certain purposes by Phlx pursuant to a License Agreement (“License”) with Nasdaq. The Nasdaq-100 Index® (“Index”) is determined, composed, and calculated by Nasdaq without regard to the Licensee, the Nasdaq-100 Trust SM , or the beneficial owners of Nasdaq-100 Shares SM . Nasdaq has complete control and sole discretion in determining, comprising, or calculating the Index or in modifying in any way its method for determining, comprising, or calculating the Index in the future. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, Phlx included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of the proposed rule change is to extend the existing Pilot Program, which is scheduled to expire September 1, 2007, 6 for an additional six-month period, through March 1, 2008. 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51322 (March 4, 2005), 70 FR 12260 (March 11, 2005) (SR Phlx-2005-17); 52261 (August 15, 2005), 70 FR 49004 (August 22, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-51); 53388 (February 28, 2006), 71 FR 11458 (March 7, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-13); 54387 (August 30, 2006), 71 FR 52842 (September 7, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-48); and 55285 (February 13, 2007), 72 FR 8053 (February 22, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2007-10). Position limits impose a ceiling on the number of option contracts in each class on the same side of the market relating to the same underlying security that can be held or written by an investor or group of investors acting in concert. Exchange Rule 1002 (not proposed to be amended herein) establishes corresponding exercise limits. Exercise limits prohibit an investor or group of investors acting in concert from exercising more than a specified number of puts or calls in a particular class within five consecutive business days. Rule 1001 subjects equity options to one of five different position limits depending on the trading volume and outstanding shares of the underlying security. Rule 1002 establishes exercise limits for the corresponding options at the same levels as the corresponding security's position limits. 7 7 Rule 1002 states, in relevant part, “* * * no member or member organization shall exercise, for any account in which such member or member organization has an interest or for the account of any partner, officer, director or employee thereof or for the account of any customer, a long position in any option contract of a class of options dealt in on the Exchange (or, respecting an option not dealt in on the Exchange, another exchange if the member or member organization is not a member of that exchange) if as a result thereof such member or member organization, or partner, officer, director or employee thereof or customer, acting alone or in concert with others, directly or indirectly, has or will have exercised within any five

(5)consecutive business days aggregate long positions in that class (put or call) as set forth as the position limit in Rule 1001, in the case of options on a stock or on an Exchange-Traded Fund Share. * * *” Standard Position and Exercise Limit The Pilot Program increases the standard position and exercise limits for equity options traded on the Exchange and for options overlying QQQQ to the following levels: 8 Except when the Pilot Program is in effect. Standard equity option contract limit 8 Pilot program equity option contract limit 13,500 25,000 22,500 50,000 31,500 75,000 60,000 200,000 75,000 250,000 Standard QQQQ option contract limit Pilot program QQQQ option contract limit 300,000 900,000 To date, the Exchange believes that there have been no adverse affects on the market as a result of these increases in the limits for equity option contracts and options overlying QQQQ. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 9 in general, and furthers the objective of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 10 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and the national market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest, by extending the Pilot Program for an additional six months. 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others No written comments were either solicited or received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change does not:

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

(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(3)become operative for 30 days from the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 11 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 12 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 13 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 14 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest because it will allow the Pilot Program to continue uninterrupted. For this reason, the Commission designates that the proposed rule change become operative immediately. 15 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. Phlx has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement. 14 *Id.* 15 For purposes only of waiving the operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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 Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-Phlx-2007-58 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Phlx-2007-58. 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 will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of Phlx. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Phlx-2007-58 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 16 16 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-16529 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5901] Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Artisans and Kings: Selected Treasures From the Louvre” SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, *et seq.* ; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, *et seq.* ), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the three additional objects to be included in the exhibition “Artisans and Kings: Selected Treasures from the Louvre,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the three additional exhibit objects at the Denver Art Museum, Denver, Colorado, from on or about October 6, 2007, until on or about January 6, 2008, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a list of the three additional objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202/453-8052). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001. Dated: August 15, 2007. C. Miller Crouch, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-16586 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5900] Culturally Significant Object Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Khatchkar of Gtic ” SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, *et seq.* ; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, *et seq.* ), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the object “Khatchkar of Gtic ,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, is of cultural significance. The object is imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit object at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York, from on or about August 20, 2007, until on or about August 1, 2008, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. The action of the United States in this matter, and the immunity based on the application of the provisions of law involved, do not represent or imply any change in the position of the United States regarding the status of modern-day Nagorno-Karabakh. Public Notice of these determinations is ordered to be published in the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact the Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202/453-8050). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001. Dated: August 15, 2007. C. Miller Crouch, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-16588 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5902] Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Medieval and Renaissance Treasures From the Victoria & Albert Museum” SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, *et seq.* ; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, *et seq.* ), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the exhibition “Medieval and Renaissance Treasures from the Victoria & Albert Museum,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Norton Museum of Art, West Palm Beach, Florida, from on or about October 20, 2007, until on or about January 6, 2008, the Speed Art Museum, Louisville, Kentucky, from on or about January 22, 2008, to on or about April 20, 2008, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York, from on or about May 19, 2008, to on or about August 17, 2008, the High Museum of Art, Atlanta, Georgia, from on or about October 11, 2008, to on or about January 4, 2009, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the **Federal Register** . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202/453-8052). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001. Dated: August 15, 2007. C. Miller Crouch, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-16585 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5899] United States Proposals for 2008 Universal Postal Union

(UPU)Congress AGENCY: Department of State. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of State solicits ideas and suggestions for proposals that the U.S. Government could submit to the plenipotentiary Congress of the Universal Postal Union

(UPU)to be held in Nairobi, Kenya from August 13 to September 3, 2008. The deadline for submission of proposals by an individual UPU member country is February 12, 2008. DATES: Written suggestions for draft proposals for the Nairobi UPU Congress should reach the Department of State by September 30, 2007. ADDRESSES: Your suggestions may be sent to the Department of State by one of the following methods: • *E-mail:* *DelehantyDM@state.gov* or *WoodCS@state.gov.* • *Fax:*

(202)647-8902. • *Mail:* Mr. Dennis Delehanty, Foreign Affairs Officer, Office of Technical Specialized Agencies (IO/T), Bureau of International Organization Affairs, Department of State, 2201 C Street, NW., Room 5333, Washington, DC 20520. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Dennis Delehanty, Foreign Affairs Officer, Office of Technical Specialized Agencies (IO/T), Bureau of International Organization Affairs, Department of State,

(202)647-4197. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under Article 122 of the UPU General Regulations, proposals that are submitted to the International Bureau at least six months before the start of Congress will be accepted. A proposal submitted between six and four months before the start of Congress will be accepted only if it is supported by at least two member countries. A proposal submitted between four and two months before the Congress will be accepted only if it supported by at least eight member countries; proposals submitted after that date will not be accepted. From October through December of this year, the State Department will lead a consultation process among U.S. stakeholders to review the suggestions received. This process will culminate in the drafting of proposals that the U.S. Government will submit to the Nairobi Congress. For reference, the 32 proposals that the United States submitted to the 2004 Bucharest UPU Congress, either independently or together with other member countries, are available on the State Department Web site at the following link: *http://www.state.gov/p/io/ipp/usgdoc/puc/43124.htm.* Dated: August 14, 2007. Dennis M. Delehanty, Foreign Affairs Officer, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-16595 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-19-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [Docket No. OST-2007-27407] National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission AGENCY: Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of meeting location and time. SUMMARY: This notice lists the location and time of the fourth, fifth and sixth meetings of the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John V. Wells, Chief Economist, U.S. Department of Transportation,

(202)366-9224, *jack.wells@dot.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By **Federal Register** Notice dated March 12, 2007, and in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (“FACA”) (5 U.S.C. App. 2) and the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (“SAFETEA-LU”) (Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144), the U.S. Department of Transportation (the “Department”) issued a notice of intent to form the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission (the “Financing Commission”). Section 11142(a) of SAFETEA-LU established the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission and charged it with analyzing the future highway and transit needs and the finances of the Highway Trust Fund and with making recommendations regarding alternative approaches to financing transportation infrastructure. Notice of Meeting Location and Time The Commissioners have agreed to hold their fourth, fifth and sixth meetings from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Wednesday, September 05, 2007; Thursday, October 18, 2007; and Thursday, November 15, 2007, respectively. All meetings will be open to the public and are scheduled to take place at the Department's headquarters building, located at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, 20590. If you need accommodations because of a disability or require additional information to attend these meetings, please contact Robert Mariner in the office of the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy via e-mail at *robert.mariner@dot.gov,* or by phone at

(202)493-0064. Issued on this 15th day of August, 2007. John V. Wells, Chief Economist, U.S. Department of Transportation, Designated Federal Official. [FR Doc. E7-16480 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary [Docket No. OST-2007-29013] Senior Executive Service Performance Review Boards Membership AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of Performance Review Board

(PRB)appointments. SUMMARY: DOT publishes the names of the persons selected to serve on the various Departmental PRBs as required by 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy A. Mowry, Director, Departmental Office of Human Resource Management,

(202)366-4088. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The persons named below have been selected to serve on one or more Departmental PRBs. Issued in Washington, DC, on August 15, 2007. Linda J. Washington, Assistant Secretary for Administration. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Alston, Sherri Y. Baxter, John R. Binder, Susan Ewen, Paula D. Fong, Gene K. Furst, Anthony T. Gee, King W. Gibbs, David C. Halladay, Michael L. Henderson, Gary L. Hochman, Jill L. Holian, Thomas P. Horne, Dwight A. Isler, Frederick D. Johnson, Christine M. Judycki, Dennis C. Juhasz Jr., Barna Kenney, Marcia G. Kussy, Edward V. A. Liff, Diane R. Lindley, Jeffrey A. Lwin, Myint Marchese, April Paniati, Jeffrey F. Park, Albert T. Prosperi, Patricia A. Ray, James D. Ridenour, Melisa Shepherd, Gloria Morgan Sheridan, Margo Skaer, Frederick C. Smith, Willie H. St John, James E. Steger, Alan R. Toole, Joseph S. Toole, Patricia Trentacoste, Michael Wright, Frederick G. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Griffith, Michael S. Hartman, Daniel Horan, Charles A. Hugel, David McMurray, Rose A. Minor, Larry W. Pelcovits, Pamela M. Powers-King, Mary E. Quade, William A. Rohde, Suzanne Tebeau Rutledge, Judith Shelton, Terry T. Thomas, D Marlene Federal Railroad Administration Bachner, Jane H. Cothen, Grady C. Ditmeyer, Steven R. Eby, Clifford Haley, Michael T. Leeds, John G. Lindsey, Seth M. Logue, Michael J. Pritchard, Edward W. Reid, Margaret B. Strang, Jo E. Tessler, Mark Yachmetz, Mark E. Federal Transit Administration Biehl, Scott A. Borinsky, Susan C. Doyle, Richard H. Horner, David B. Hynes-Cherin, Brigid Irvin, John W. Patrick, Robert C. Rogers, Leslie T. Schruth, Susan E. Simon, Marisol Taylor, Yvette Tuccillo, Robert J. Maritime Administration Blum, Margaret D. Bohnert, Roger V. Brohl, Helen Byrne, Joseph Caponiti, James E. Carlton, Bruce J. Harrelson, Thomas W. Jones, Taylor E. McKeever, Jean E. McMahon, Christopher J. Nelson, Julie Pixa, Rand Roberson, Eileen S. Stewart, Joseph D. Weaver, Janice G. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Abraham, Julie Amoni, Marilena Carra, Joseph S. Cooke, Anthony Demeter, Kathleen C. Guerci, Lloyd S. Harris, Claude H. Hollowell, William T. Kanianthra, Joseph N. Kratzke, Stephen R. Markison, Marlene K. McLaughlin, Brian McLaughlin, Susan Medford, Ronald L. Michael, Jeffrey P. Monk, Michael W. O'Brien, Margaret Saul, Roger A. Simons, James F. Smith, Daniel C. Walter, Gregory A. Wood, Stephen P. Office of Inspector General Alves, Theodore P. Batts, Rebecca Beitel, Richard C. Dettelbach, Brian A. Dobbs, David A. Hunt, Robin K. Hyde, Kurt W. Lee, Charles H. Leng, Rebecca C. Tornquist, David Office of the Secretary Allen, Bernestine Cumber, Husein DeCarme, David G. Eisner, Neil R. Fields, George C. Gabel, Roberta D. Geier, Paul M. Gretch, Paul L. Henry J. Richard Herlihy, Thomas W. Heup, Ellen L. Homan, Todd M. Horn, Donald H. Howard, Laurie Hurdle, Lana T. Jones, Mary N. Kaleta, Judith S. Kendall, Quintin C. Knapp, Rosalind A. Lawson, Linda L. Litman, David J. McDermott, Susan E. Mintz, Dan Mowry, Nancy A. Neff, Lawrence Ira Patillo, Jacquelyn R. Podberesky, Samuel Privett, Lee A. Reynolds, Michael W. Sabatine, Melissa Schmidt, Robert T. Shaw, Michael E. Stefani, Alexis M. Trujillo, J. Michael Washington, Linda J. Wells, John V. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Brigham, Edward A. Edwards, Krista Gerard, Stacey L. Richard, Robert Willke, Theodore L. Research and Innovative Technology Administration Chang, William J. Coonley, Philip S. Keeler, Nelson H. Leone, Kelly Lev, David E. O'Donnell, John P. Tompkins, Curtis J. St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation Middlebrook, Craig H. Pisani, Salvatore L. Office of Inspector General (Not Department of Transportation Employees) Michael Delgado, Department of the Treasury Melissa Heist, Environmental Protection Agency Sara B. Gibson, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation David Montoya, Department of the Interior Michael Stephens, Department of Housing and Urban Development George W. Collard, Department of Energy Robert Taylor, Department of the Treasury Kathleen S. Tighe, Department of Agriculture Karen L. Ellise, Department of Agriculture [FR Doc. E7-16564 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Noise Compatibility Program Notice; Austin-Bergstrom International Airport, Austin, TX AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)announces that it is reviewing a proposed noise compatibility program that was submitted for Austin-Bergstrom International Airport under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47501 et seq. (the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act, hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) and 14 CFR part 150 by the City of Austin, Texas. This program was submitted subsequent to a determination by FAA that associated noise exposure maps submitted under 14 CFR part 150 for Austin-Bergstrom International Airport were in compliance with applicable requirements, effective February 15, 2007, and published in the **Federal Register** February 23, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 36). The proposed noise compatibility program will be approved or disapproved on or before February 10, 2008. DATES: *Effective Date:* The effective date of the start of FAA's review of the noise compatibility program is August 14, 2007. The public comment periods ends October 13, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Blackford, Federal Aviation Administration, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137,

(817)222-5607. Comments on the proposed noise compatibility program should also be submitted to the above office. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces that the FAA is reviewign a proposed noise compatibility program for Austin-Bergstrom International Airport which will be approved or disapproved on or before February 10, 2008. This notice also announces the availability of this program for public review and comment. An airport operator who has submitted noise exposure maps that are found by FAA to be in compliance with the requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations

(FAR)part 150, promulgated pursuant to the Act, may submit a noise compatibilty program for FAA approval which sets forth the measures the operator has taken or proposes to reduce existing non-compatible uses and prevent the introduction of additional non-compatible uses. The FAA has formally received the noise compatibility program for Austin-Bergstrom International Airport, effective on August 14, 2007. The airport operator has requested that the FAA review this material and that the noise mitigation measures, to be implemented jointly by the airport and surrounding communities, be approved as a noise compatibility program under section 47504 of the Act. Preliminary review of the submitted material indicates that it conforms to FAR part 150 requirements for the submittal of noise compatibility programs, but that further review will be necessary prior to approval or disapproval of the program. The formal review period, limited by law to a maximum of 180 days, will e completed on or before February 10, 2008. The FAA's detailed evaluation will be conducted under the provisions of 14 CFR part 150, section 150.33. The primary considerations in the evaluation process are whether the proposed measures may reduce the level of aviation safety or create an undue burden on interstate or foreign commerce, and whether they are reasonably consistent with obtaining the goal of reducing existing non-compatible land uses and preventing the introduction of additional non-compatible land uses. Interested persons are invited to comment on the proposed program with specific reference to these factors. All comments relating to these factors, other than those properly addressed to local land use authorities, will be considered by the FAA to the extent practicable. Copies of the noise exposure maps and the proposed noise compatibility program are available for examination at the following locations: Federal Aviation Administration, 2601 Meacham Boulevard, Fort Worth, Texas; Mr. Jim Smith, 3600 Presidential Blvd., Suite 411, Austin, Texas 76719. Questions may be directed to the individual named above under the heading, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Issued in Forth Worth, Texas, August 14, 2007. Kelvin L. Solco, Manager, Airports Division. [FR Doc. 07-4106 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 21

Traces to 21 documents

U.S. Code