Notices. Notice

29,537 words·~134 min read·/register/2007/09/28/07-4799

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

BILLING CODE 4311-AM-M DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs Colorado River Tribe-Health and Safety Code, Article 2—Liquor AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice publishes an amendment to the Colorado River Tribal Health and Safety Code, Article 2, Liquor, Chapter 6, Sections 2-601 through 620. The Code regulates and controls the possession, sale and consumption of liquor within the Colorado River Tribe's Reservation. The land is located on trust land and this Code allows for the possession and sale of alcoholic beverages within Colorado River Tribe's Reservation.

This Code will increase the ability of the tribal government to control the distribution and possession of liquor within their reservation and at the same time will provide an important source of revenue and strengthening of the tribal government and the delivery of tribal services. DATES: *Effective Date:* This Act is effective as of September 28, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharlot Johnson, Tribal Government Services Officer, Western Regional Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 400 N. 5th Street, Two Arizona Center, 12th Floor, Phoenix, Arizona 85001;

Telephone

(602)379-6786; Fax

(602)379-4100; or Elizabeth Colliflower, Office of Tribal Services, 1849 C Street, NW., Mail Stop 4513-MIB, Washington, DC 20240; Telephone

(202)513-7627; Fax

(202)208-5113. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the Act of August 15, 1953; Public Law 83-277, 67 Stat. 586, 18 U.S.C. 1161, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in *Rice* v. *Rehner* , 463 U.S. 713 (1983), the Secretary of the Interior shall certify and publish in the **Federal Register** notice of adopted liquor ordinances for the purpose of regulating liquor transactions in Indian country. The Colorado River Tribal Council adopted this amendment to the Colorado River Tribal Health and Safety Code, Article 2, Liquor by Ordinance No. 04-1 on March 12, 2004. This notice is published in accordance with the authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. I certify that the Tribal Council duly adopted this amendment to the Colorado River Indian Tribes—Health and Safety Code, Article 2—Liquor on March 12, 2004. Dated: September 21, 2007. Carl J. Artman, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. The amendment to Colorado River Indian Tribes-Health and Safety Code, Article 2—Liquor, Chapter 6, Sections 2-601 through 620 reads as follows: Chapter 6. Bar, Liquor and Package Liquor Privilege Tax Section 2-601. General Purpose. The Colorado River Indian Tribes have a significant interest in protecting the health, safety and general welfare of its members, the residents within the boundaries of the Reservation and those persons and businesses doing business on and/or visiting the Reservation. The purpose of the bar, liquor and package liquor privilege tax is to regulate and monitor the sale of alcohol within the boundaries of the Reservation and to raise revenues to fund health, safety and general welfare programs and services. Section 2-602. Definitions. In addition to the definitions in Section 2-101, for purposes of this Chapter, whenever any of the following words, terms or definitions is used herein, they shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this Chapter:

(1)“Bar” means and includes an establishment used, maintained, advertised and held out to the public as a place which serves liquor.

(2)“Department” shall mean the Department of Revenue and Finance of the Colorado River Indian Tribes which is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the tax revenue laws of the Tribes and the investigation, examination and audit of tribal finances, departments, offices, officers and employees.

(3)“Director” shall mean the Director of the Department of Revenue and Finance of the Colorado River Indian Tribes.

(4)“Packaged liquor at retail” means a place of business in which the premises are used for the retail sale of liquor in original package for consumption off the premises where sold.

(5)“Records” shall mean any books, papers, documents, memoranda, supporting documents, schedules, attachments, lists, computer records, electronic data, business records, papers, vouchers, accounts and financial statements.

(6)“Return” or “Tax Return” shall mean any form, report or document prescribed and approved by the Department for the return of a tax obligation including any supporting schedules, attachments, worksheets and lists.

(7)“Taxes” shall include taxes, interest, penalties and costs of collection assessed or imposed pursuant to this Chapter or Title 20: Taxation of the Tribal Code. Section 2-603. Imposition of Tax. There is hereby levied and imposed a tax upon the privilege of receiving a liquor license to sell liquor served or prepared at either a restaurant or bar within the boundaries of the Colorado River Indian Reservation and upon privilege of receiving a liquor license to sell packaged liquor at retail within the boundaries of the Reservation. Section 2-604. Rate of Tax. The tax rate imposed under this Chapter shall be established by the Tribal Council of the Colorado River Indian Tribes and shall be no less than two percent (2%) nor more than ten percent (10%) of the purchase price of the liquor. Until the tax rate is changed by Resolution of the Tribal Council, the current tax rate imposed under this Chapter shall be levied, imposed and collected at the rate of six and six-tenths percent (6.6%) of the purchase price of the liquor. Section 2-605. Tax is Additional Tax. The tax herein levied and imposed shall be in addition to all other taxes and fees. Section 2-606. Exemptions. The provision of liquor by a person or entity not occurring at a place of business held out as a retailer of such liquor is exempt from the provisions of this Chapter. Section 2-607. Liability for Payment.

(1)The legal incidence of and liability for payment of said tax shall be on the “retailer”.

(2)Each retailer within the boundaries of the Reservation, regardless of whether they are licensed under this Article, shall have the duty to collect and account for the tax imposed herein, and shall remit all due and owing taxes from the sale of liquor and/or packaged alcoholic liquor to consumers, whether such payment is by credit or cash, to the Department of Revenue and Finance at the time such payment is due. Section 2-608. Collection of Tax. The invoice, receipt or other statement of payment given to the consumer at the time of payment shall show the amount due under the tax provided herein which shall be stated separately on said invoice, receipt or statement. The retailer shall be liable for the payment of the tax to the Tribes, whether any additional fee is actually collected from the consumer. Section 2-609. Payment of Tax. Payment of the tax shall be made at the time the tax return is due. Section 2-610. Administration. All provisions of Title 20 of the Tribal Code, the Taxation Code, Article I, shall apply to this Chapter. Section 2-611. Tax Identification Number. Upon receipt of an application for a license with the Board pursuant to Chapter 2 of this Article, all retailers intending to conduct business within the boundaries of the Reservation or currently conducting business within the boundaries of the Reservation on the effective date of this Article shall, within thirty

(30)days of the effective date of this Article, be assigned a taxpayer identification number by the Department pursuant to Title 20, Section 20-1417. Section 2-612. Filing of Return. All retailers shall pay to the Department of Revenue and Finance all taxes under this Chapter. Each retailer that sells liquor and/or packaged liquor at retail within the boundaries of the Reservation shall file monthly tax returns showing tax receipts received during each monthly period on forms prescribed by the Department. The tax return shall be filed before the last day of the calendar month next succeeding the month for which the tax return is made and shall be accompanied by payment of all taxes due and owing for the month covered by said tax return. Section 2-613. Records. All retailers shall maintain and preserve complete and accurate books, records and accounts showing the gross receipts for sales of liquor and/or packaged liquor at retail and the taxes collected each day and shall make available such books, records and accounts to the Director of the Department of Revenue and Finance for examination for those periods of time prescribed in Article I, Chapter 8 of the Taxation Code. Section 2-614. Failure to Pay Tax. Taxes that are not remitted to the Department of Revenue and Finance on or before the due date are delinquent. Section 2-615. Violations; Additional Penalties. Any retailer which violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to comply with, or resists or opposes the enforcement of any of the provisions of this Chapter, may be assessed a penalty of not less than Seventy-Five Dollars ($75.00) nor more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) for the first violation, and not less than One Hundred Fifty Dollars ($150.00), nor more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) for the second violation, and not less than Three Hundred Dollars ($300.00) nor more than Five Thousand ($5,000.00) for the third violation, and not less than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) nor more than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) for the fourth and each subsequent violation, or five

(5)times the amount of the tax imposed, if any, whichever is higher, for the second and each subsequent violation. A separate and distinct violation shall be regarded as committed each day said retailer continues any such violation, or permits any such violation to exist after notification thereof. The penalties imposed under this Chapter shall be in addition to the tax and in addition to those penalties, if any, imposed under Article I, Chapter 7 of the Taxation Code. Section 2-616. Promulgation of Regulations. The Director shall have the power to promulgate regulations for the enforcement of the provisions of this Chapter and the collection of revenues hereunder. Section 2-617. Amendments. The provisions of this Chapter may be amended at the discretion of the Tribal Council by Ordinance or Resolution. Section 2-618. Failure to Remit; Licensing. Collection and payment of this tax may be enforced by action in any court of competent jurisdiction and failure to account for or pay the tax by retailers of taxable alcoholic liquor shall be cause for revocation of any license of such retailer or applicable to the premises thereof, in addition to any other penalty provided in this Article. Section 2-619. Application to the Tribes. The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to the Tribes including any governmental entity or enterprise of the Tribes. For purposes of this Chapter, the Tribes, including any governmental entity or enterprise of the Tribes, if applicable, shall be considered a “retailer.” Section 2-620. Nondiscrimination. No provision of this Chapter shall be construed as imposing a tax that discriminates on the basis of whether a bar, restaurant, packaged liquor store or similar establishment is owned, managed or operated by a member of the Tribes. [FR Doc. E7-19150 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-4J-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [AK-025-07-1610-DQ-089L] Notice of Availability of Kobuk-Seward Peninsula Proposed Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement, AK AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability. SUMMARY: In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq.* ) and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. 1701 *et seq.* ), the Bureau of Land Management

(BLM)has prepared a Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement (Proposed RMP/Final EIS) for the Kobuk-Seward Peninsula Planning Area in Alaska. DATES: The BLM Planning Regulations state that any person who participated in the planning process, and has an interest that is or may be adversely affected, may protest the BLM's approval or amendment of an RMP within 30 days of the date that the Environmental Protection Agency publishes its Notice of Availability in the **Federal Register** . Instructions for filing of protests are described in the Dear Reader letter of the Kobuk-Seward Peninsula Proposed RMP/Final EIS. Please consult BLM's Planning Regulations (43 CFR 1610.5-2) for further instructions on protests. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeanie Cole, BLM Central Yukon Field Office, 1150 University Avenue, Fairbanks, AK 99709,

(907)474-2340, *jeanie_cole@ak.blm.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Kobuk-Seward Peninsula planning area covers approximately 11.9 million acres of BLM-managed land in northwestern Alaska. The Kobuk-Seward Peninsula Proposed RMP/Final EIS focuses on the principles of multiple use and sustained yield as prescribed by section 202 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA). The Proposed RMP/Final EIS considers and analyzes four alternatives, including a No Action and a Preferred Alternative. The alternatives provide for an array of variable levels of commodity production and resource protection and restoration. The Proposed RMP/Final EIS will help the BLM meet its mandate of multiple use and sustained yield. The alternatives were developed based on public scoping and participation, and the requirements of the BLM's Land Use Planning Handbook (H-1601-1). The public involvement and collaboration process included 9 public scoping meetings, 12 public meetings on the Draft RMP/EIS, and meetings with other interested parties. Four primary issues were raised and addressed through this planning process.

(1)Recreation, including how the BLM should manage recreation to provide and maintain a diversity of experiences on BLM-managed public lands while protecting subsistence resources and opportunity, and what level of commercial recreational permits is appropriate, particularly in the Squirrel River area;

(2)Subsistence, including maintaining and protecting subsistence uses;

(3)Minerals Management, determining which areas should be available for mineral exploration and development;

(4)Access/Travel Management, allowing for access to BLM-managed public lands for various purposes. In addition to these issues, the Proposed RMP/Final EIS addresses management of various program areas such as vegetation, fish and wildlife habitat, fire management, cultural resources, visual resources, forest products, livestock grazing, and realty. The Proposed RMP/Final EIS also resulted in development of required operating procedures (ROP), which are requirements, procedures, management practices, or design features the BLM adopts as operational requirements for all permitted activities. The ROPs were developed to ensure that Alaska Statewide Land Health Standards are met. The Squirrel River area contains BLM-and-State-managed land, and is surrounded by National Park Service-and Fish and Wildlife Service-managed lands. Ultimately, the Northwest Arctic Borough will also be a land owner. Approximately 14 percent of the public comments were related to recreation and 7 percent were specific to the Squirrel River. Relatively easy access to this area from Kotzebue by fixed-wing aircraft, a large number of gravel bars that can be used for landing strips, and the reduced level of regulation compared to other surrounding federal lands, make the Squirrel River a popular destination for hunters. Local subsistence hunters have expressed concern about this area for more than a decade, raising issues such as competition with subsistence hunters by large numbers of sport hunters, potential deflection of migrating caribou away from subsistence villages, waste of game meat, lack of enforcement, and unmanaged commercial guiding/transporter operations. Alternatives B, C, and D of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS all identify the Squirrel River as a special recreation management area. One component of the BLM's preferred alternative

(D)is to maintain recreational use of the Squirrel River at the current level while developing a recreation area management plan. This recreation area management plan, developed in concert with the State and Northwest Arctic Borough, both of which do or soon will own land in the Squirrel River watershed, would develop special rules to address the issues in the area. As required by 43 CFR 1610.7-2, areas with potential for designation as Areas of Critical Environmental Concern

(ACEC)have been considered during the planning process. Approximately seven percent of the total comments submitted during the public-comment period pertained to ACECs. The Proposed RMP/Final EIS identifies six ACECs for designation in the BLM's preferred alternative. Final acreage for areas designated as ACECs will depend on the result of land conveyance to the State of Alaska and Native Corporations. The following table provides a summary of proposed ACECs and descriptions of resource use limitations provided by decisions made in the proposed plan. Table 1.—Proposed ACECs under Alternative D (preferred alternative) of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS Name of area Acreage Resource use limitations Nulato Hills ACEC 1.1 million Limited OHV designation. Retained in Federal ownership. Closed to grazing outside of existing allotments. Designate as ROW avoidance area. Open to fluid mineral leasing subject to special stipulations. Open to locatable mineral entry subject to required operating procedures. Western Arctic Caribou Herd Insect Relief ACEC 1.5 million Same as Nulato Hills except it would not be designated as a ROW avoidance area and the entire ACEC would be closed to grazing. Inglutalik Watershed ACEC 466,000 Same as Nulato Hills except it would not be a ROW avoidance area. Ungalik Watershed ACEC 264,000 Same as Nulato Hills except it would not be a ROW avoidance area. Shaktoolik Watershed ACEC 234,000 Same as Nulato Hills except it would not be a ROW avoidance area. Mount Osborn ACEC 82,000 Same as Nulato Hills except the level of commercial recreational use may be limited, it would be open to grazing, and it would not be a ROW avoidance area. During the public comment period on the Draft RMP/EIS the BLM received nine additional ACEC nominations. The areas nominated were: Coastal areas near Kivalina, Teller, Koyuk, and Unalakleet; the Bendeleben and Darby mountains; the Agiapuk and American rivers; and the multiple major pathways and convergence area of caribou migration routes in the vicinity of Selawik-Kobuk. The BLM evaluated these areas for possible ACEC designation and determined that designation was not warranted. The BLM will not retain sufficient land in the Teller, Kivalina and Koyuk areas to warrant designation, Unalakleet is outside of the Planning Area, and the BLM does not administer any land along the American River. The Bendeleben and Darby mountains and the Agiapuk River have some relevant values but do not meet the importance criteria defined under 43 CFR 1601.7-2. The caribou migration routes meet the relevance criteria of supporting a significant wildlife resource. However, data on caribou migration routes is not sufficient to support the importance criteria. In fact, the limited data available seems to indicate that caribou migrate less on BLM-managed public land and more on private, National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, and State lands. The primary areas of BLM-managed public land in this migration area are the Squirrel River, which was identified as a special recreation management area where BLM proposes to develop a recreation area management plan, and the northern Nulato Hills, which is within the proposed Nulato Hills ACEC. All comments received on the plan were analyzed and evaluated. Appendix J of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS contains all substantive comments received and BLM responses to those comments. Comments on the Draft RMP/EIS received from the public and internal BLM review comments were incorporated into the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. Public comments resulted in changes to the preferred alternative through the addition of clarifying text and additional analysis of impacts. A summary of these changes is included in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS after the Executive Summary. Copies of the Kobuk-Seward Peninsula Proposed RMP/Final EIS have been sent to affected Federal, State, and Local Government agencies and to interested parties. Copies of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS have also been sent to individuals, agencies, and groups as requested or as required by regulation or policy. Copies of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS are available for public inspection at the BLM Fairbanks District Office at 1150 University Avenue, Fairbanks, Alaska, during normal business hours from 7:45 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday except holidays. Interested persons may also view the Proposed RMP/Final EIS on the Internet at *http://www.ak.blm.gov/ksp* or at one of the following locations in Alaska: The BLM Fairbanks District Office, Fairbanks; BLM Nome Field Station, Nome; BLM Anchorage Field Office, Anchorage; BLM Alaska State Office, Public Room, Anchorage; Noel Wien Library, Fairbanks; Keyoayah Kozga Library, Nome; Chukchi Consortium Library, Kotzebue; Anchorage Municipal Library, Anchorage; Alaska State Library, Juneau; Tuzzy Consortium Library, Barrow; Selawik National Wildlife Refuge Headquarters, Kotzebue; Northwest Arctic Borough Planning Department, Kotzebue. E-mail and faxed protests will not be accepted as valid protests unless the protesting party also provides the original letter by either regular or overnight mail postmarked by the close of the protest period to one of the following addresses, or as appropriate: Regular Mail: Director (210), *Attention:* Brenda Williams, P.O. Box 66538, Washington, DC 20035. Overnight Mail: Director (210), *Attention:* Brenda Williams, 1620 L Street, NW., Suite 1075, Washington, DC 20036. Under these conditions, the BLM will consider the e-mail or faxed protest as an advance copy and it will receive full consideration. If you wish to provide the BLM with such advance notification, please direct faxed protests to the attention of the BLM protest coordinator at 202-452-5112, and e-mails to *Brenda_Hudgens-Williams@blm.gov.* Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your protest, you should be aware that your entire protest—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your protest to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Dated: August 20, 2007. Julia Dougan, Acting State Director. [FR Doc. E7-19064 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Reclamation Madera Irrigation District Water Supply Enhancement Project AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement

(EIS)and notice of public scoping meeting. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) proposes to prepare an EIS for the proposed Madera Irrigation District

(MID)Water Supply Enhancement Project (Project), in which MID would construct a groundwater bank on the property known as Madera Ranch, west of the City of Madera, Madera County, CA. The Federal actions include approval from Reclamation for MID to bank a portion of their Central Valley Project

(CVP)Friant Division contract water supply outside of its service area in the newly constructed groundwater bank at Madera Ranch and approval to extend the Reclamation-owned 24.2 Canal. DATES: Reclamation will hold a scoping meeting to seek public input on topics, issues, and alternatives to be considered in the EIS. The scoping meeting will occur on October 22, 2007 at 6:30 p.m. Written comments should be mailed to Reclamation at the address below by close of business November 5, 2007. If special assistance is required at the scoping meeting, please contact Ms. Patti Clinton, Reclamation, at

(559)487-5127, TDD

(559)487-5933, or via e-mail at *pclinton@mp.usbr.gov* no less than five working days prior to the meeting. ADDRESSES: The scoping meeting will be held at the Madera Irrigation District Office, 2152 Road 28 1/4, Madera, CA 93637. Written comments on the scope of the environmental document should be sent to Ms. Patti Clinton, Bureau of Reclamation, 1243 N Street, Fresno, CA 93721, via e-mail at *pclinton@mp.usbr.gov* , or fax to 559-487-5397. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Patti Clinton, Reclamation, at the above address,

(559)487-5127; or MID, 12152 Road 28 1/4, Madera, CA 93637-9199

(559)268-2483, fax:

(559)673-0564. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), MID approved its Water Supply Enhancement Project in September 2005 based on a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR)—State Clearing House # 2005031068. At the time, there was no Federal action. Reclamation commented on the draft EIR stating that once MID proposed a Federal action, Reclamation would need to complete and satisfy all NEPA and Endangered Species Act requirements before approving any Federal action. This EIS has been initiated in response to MID's request that Reclamation approve the banking of CVP water outside of its service area in the proposed Madera Ranch water bank, as well as alterations to Federal facilities. The primary objectives of the Project are to: • Enhance water supply reliability and flexibility; • Help maintain water costs at levels that are affordable to farmers; • Reduce aquifer overdraft; • Improve groundwater quality; and • Encourage conjunctive use, where appropriate. The Project includes facilities necessary to store water in and recover water from the underlying aquifer. Phase 1 would be recharge-related facilities only. Phase 2 would involve supplemental recharge facilities and facilities for recovery of stored water. The water bank would have a total storage capacity of 250,000 acre-feet (AF), and could recharge or recover up to 55,000 AF of water per year. Public Disclosure Before including your name, address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Dated: August 22, 2007. Susan M. Fry, Regional Environmental Officer, Mid-Pacific Region. [FR Doc. E7-19249 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-MN-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 731-TA-1111-1113 (Final)] Glycine From India, Japan, and Korea AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Scheduling of the final phase of antidumping investigations. SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives notice of the scheduling of the final phase of antidumping investigation Nos. 731-TA-1111-1113 (Final) under section 735(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)) to determine whether an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of less-than-fair-value imports from India, Japan, and Korea of glycine, provided for in statistical reporting number 2922.49.4020 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. 1 1 For purposes of these investigations, the Department of Commerce has defined the subject merchandise as “* * * glycine, which in its solid ( *i.e.* , crystallized) form is a free-flowing crystalline material. Glycine is used as a sweetener/taste enhancer, buffering agent, reabsorbable amino acid, chemical intermediate, metal complexing agent, dietary supplement, and is used in certain pharmaceuticals. The scope of each of these investigations covers glycine in any form and purity level. Although glycine blended with other materials is not covered by the scope of each of these investigations, glycine to which relatively small quantities of other materials have been added is covered by the scope. Glycine's chemical composition is C 2 H 5 NO 2 and is normally classified under subheading 2922.49.4020 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). The scope of each of these investigations also covers precursors of dried crystalline glycine, including, but not limited to, glycine slurry ( *i.e.* , glycine in a non-crystallized form) and sodium glycinate. Glycine slurry is classified under the same HTSUS subheading as crystallized glycine (2922.49.4020) and sodium glycinate is classified under subheading HTSUS 2922.49.8000.” For further information concerning the conduct of this phase of the investigations, hearing procedures, and rules of general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A and C (19 CFR part 207). DATES: *Effective Date:* September 13, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Russell Duncan (202-708-4727; *russell.duncan@usitc.gov* ), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server ( *http://www.usitc.gov* ). The public record for these investigations may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket

(EDIS)at *http://edis.usitc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Background.* The final phase of these investigations is being scheduled as a result of affirmative preliminary determinations by the Department of Commerce that imports of glycine from Japan and Korea are being sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 733 of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b). The investigations were requested in a petition filed on March 30, 2007, by GEO Specialty Chemicals, Lafayette, IN. Although the Department of Commerce has postponed its preliminary determination as to whether imports of glycine from India are being, or are likely to be sold, in the United States at less than fair value, 2 for purposes of efficiency the Commission is scheduling the final phase of that investigation so that it may proceed concurrently with the Commission's investigations concerning Japan and Korea. 2 *Glycine from India: Postponement of Preliminary Determination of Antidumping Duty Investigation,* 72 FR 48257, August 23, 2007. Commerce is scheduled to make its preliminary determination by October 26, 2007. *Participation in the investigations and public service list.* Persons, including industrial users of the subject merchandise and, if the merchandise is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations, wishing to participate in the final phase of these investigations as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in section 201.11 of the Commission's rules, no later than 21 days prior to the hearing date specified in this notice. A party that filed a notice of appearance during the preliminary phase of the investigations need not file an additional notice of appearance during this final phase. The Secretary will maintain a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the investigations. *Limited disclosure of business proprietary information

(BPI)under an administrative protective order

(APO)and BPI service list.* Pursuant to section 207.7(a) of the Commission's rules, the Secretary will make BPI gathered in the final phase of these investigations available to authorized applicants under the APO issued in the investigations, provided that the application is made no later than 21 days prior to the hearing date specified in this notice. Authorized applicants must represent interested parties, as defined by 19 U.S.C. 1677(9), who are parties to the investigations. A party granted access to BPI in the preliminary phase of the investigations need not reapply for such access. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO. *Staff report.* The prehearing staff report in the final phase of these investigations will be placed in the nonpublic record on November 13, 2007, and a public version will be issued thereafter, pursuant to section 207.22 of the Commission's rules. *Hearing.* The Commission will hold a hearing in connection with the final phase of these investigations beginning at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, November 28, 2007, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building. Requests to appear at the hearing should be filed in writing with the Secretary to the Commission on or before November 20, 2007. A nonparty who has testimony that may aid the Commission's deliberations may request permission to present a short statement at the hearing. All parties and nonparties desiring to appear at the hearing and make oral presentations should attend a prehearing conference to be held at 9:30 a.m. on November 21, 2007, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building. Oral testimony and written materials to be submitted at the public hearing are governed by sections 201.6(b)(2), 201.13(f), and 207.24 of the Commission's rules. Parties must submit any request to present a portion of their hearing testimony *in camera* no later than 7 business days prior to the date of the hearing. *Written submissions.* Each party who is an interested party shall submit a prehearing brief to the Commission. Prehearing briefs must conform with the provisions of section 207.23 of the Commission's rules; the deadline for filing is Wednesday, November 20, 2007. Parties may also file written testimony in connection with their presentation at the hearing, as provided in section 207.24 of the Commission's rules, and posthearing briefs, which must conform with the provisions of section 207.25 of the Commission's rules. The deadline for filing posthearing briefs is Wednesday, December 5, 2007; witness testimony must be filed no later than three days before the hearing. In addition, any person who has not entered an appearance as a party to the investigations may submit a written statement of information pertinent to the subject of the investigations, including statements of support or opposition to the petition, on or before December 5, 2007. On December 19, 2007, the Commission will make available to parties all information on which they have not had an opportunity to comment. Parties may submit final comments on this information on or before December 21, 2007, but such final comments must not contain new factual information and must otherwise comply with section 207.30 of the Commission's rules. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission's rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's rules do not authorize filing of submissions with the Secretary by facsimile or electronic means, except to the extent permitted by section 201.8 of the Commission's rules, as amended, 67 FR 68036 (November 8, 2002). Even where electronic filing of a document is permitted, certain documents must also be filed in paper form, as specified in II

(C)of the Commission's Handbook on Electronic Filing Procedures, 67 FR 68168, 68173 (November 8, 2002). Additional written submissions to the Commission, including requests pursuant to section 201.12 of the Commission's rules, shall not be accepted unless good cause is shown for accepting such submissions, or unless the submission is pursuant to a specific request by a Commissioner or Commission staff. In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission's rules, each document filed by a party to the investigations must be served on all other parties to the investigations (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service. Authority: These investigations are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.21 of the Commission's rules. By order of the Commission. Issued: September 25, 2007. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E7-19182 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701-TA-452 and 731-TA-1129-1130 (Preliminary)] Raw Flexible Magnets From China and Taiwan AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Institution of countervailing duty investigation and antidumping duty investigations and scheduling of preliminary phase investigations. SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives notice of the institution of investigations and commencement of preliminary phase countervailing duty and antidumping duty investigations Nos. 701-TA-452 and 731-TA-1129-1130 (Preliminary) under section 703(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671b(a)) (the Act) and section 733(a) (19 U.S.C. 1673b(a)) to determine whether there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of imports from China and Taiwan of raw flexible magnets, provided for in subheadings 8505.19.10 and 8505.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are alleged to be subsidized by the Government of China, 1 and that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair value. Unless the Department of Commerce extends the time for initiation pursuant to section 702(c)(1)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671a(c)(1)(B)) or 732(c)(1)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673a(c)(1)(B)), the Commission must reach preliminary determinations in countervailing duty and antidumping investigations in 45 days, or in these cases by November 5, 2007. The Commission's views are due at Commerce within five business days thereafter, or by November 13, 2007. 1 Raw flexible magnets were provided for in HTS subheading 8505.19.0040 (prior to December 19, 2004). For further information concerning the conduct of these investigations and rules of general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 207). DATES: *Effective Date:* September 21, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Olympia Hand (202-205-3182), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server ( *http://www.usitc.gov* ). The public record for these investigations may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket

(EDIS)at *http://edis.usitc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Background.* These investigations are being instituted in response to a petition filed on September 21, 2007, by Magnum Magnetics Corp., Marietta, OH. *Participation in the investigations and public service list.* Persons (other than petitioners) wishing to participate in the investigations as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in sections 201.11 and 207.10 of the Commission's rules, not later than seven days after publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** . Industrial users and (if the merchandise under investigation is sold at the retail level) representative consumer organizations have the right to appear as parties in Commission countervailing duty and antidumping investigations. The Secretary will prepare a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to these investigations upon the expiration of the period for filing entries of appearance. *Limited disclosure of business proprietary information

(BPI)under an administrative protective order

(APO)and BPI service list.* Pursuant to section 207.7(a) of the Commission's rules, the Secretary will make BPI gathered in these investigations available to authorized applicants representing interested parties (as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9)) who are parties to the investigations under the APO issued in the investigations, provided that the application is made not later than seven days after the publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** . A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO. *Conference.* The Commission's Director of Operations has scheduled a conference in connection with these investigations for 9:30 a.m. on October 12, 2007, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC. Parties wishing to participate in the conference should contact Olympia Hand (202-205-3182) not later than October 9, 2007, to arrange for their appearance. Parties in support of the imposition of countervailing and antidumping duties in these investigations and parties in opposition to the imposition of such duties will each be collectively allocated one hour within which to make an oral presentation at the conference. A nonparty who has testimony that may aid the Commission's deliberations may request permission to present a short statement at the conference. *Written submissions.* As provided in sections 201.8 and 207.15 of the Commission's rules, any person may submit to the Commission on or before October 17, 2007, a written brief containing information and arguments pertinent to the subject matter of the investigations. Parties may file written testimony in connection with their presentation at the conference no later than three days before the conference. If briefs or written testimony contain BPI, they must conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's rules do not authorize filing of submissions with the Secretary by facsimile or electronic means, except to the extent permitted by section 201.8 of the Commission's rules, as amended, 67 FR 68036 (November 8, 2002). Even where electronic filing of a document is permitted, certain documents must also be filed in paper form, as specified in II

(C)of the Commission's Handbook on Electronic Filing Procedures, 67 Fed. Reg. 68168, 68173 (November 8, 2002). In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the investigations must be served on all other parties to the investigations (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service. Authority: These investigations are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.12 of the Commission's rules. By order of the Commission. Issued: September 25, 2007. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E7-19183 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-604] In the Matter of Certain Sucralose, Sweeteners Containing Sucralose, and Related Intermediate Compounds Thereof; Notice of Commission Determination To Review and Vacate an Initial Determination Denying a Motion To Terminate the Investigation With Regard to Three Patents AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to review and vacate an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 11) of the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) in the above-captioned investigation denying a motion to terminate the investigation as to United States Patent Nos. 4,980,463, 5,470,969, and 5,034,551. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Worth, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone

(202)205-2065. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone

(202)205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at *http://www.usitc.gov.* The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket

(EDIS)at *http://edis.usitc.gov.* Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on

(202)205-1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation on May 10, 2007, based upon a complaint filed on behalf of Tate & Lyle Technology Ltd. of London, United Kingdom, and Tate & Lyle Sucralose, Inc. of Decatur, Illinois (collectively, “Tate & Lyle”). The complaint alleged a violation of section 337(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of sucralose, sweeteners containing sucralose, and related intermediate compounds thereof by reason of infringement of various claims of United States Patent Nos. 4,980,463 (“the '463 patent”), 5,470,969 (“the '969 patent”), 5,034,551 (“the '551 patent”), 5,498,709, and 7,049,435. The notice of investigation named twenty-five respondents. On June 12, 2007, respondents Changzhou Niutang Chemical Plant Co., Ltd.; U.S. Niutang Chemical, Inc.; Garuda International Inc.; Guangdong Food Industry Institute; and L&P Food Ingredient Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Changzhou”) filed a motion to terminate the investigation with respect to the '463 patent, the '969 patent, and the '551 patent. Several other respondents joined Changzhou's motion to terminate. Tate & Lyle opposed the motion. The Commission investigative attorney (“IA”) supported the motion with respect to the '551 patent, but not with respect to the '463 patent or the '969 patent. On August 8, 2007, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 11), denying Changzhou's motion to terminate the investigation with regard to the '463 patent, the '969 patent, and the '551 patent. The ALJ issued his order in the form of an ID under 19 CFR 210.42, pursuant to the notice of investigation. The complainants, certain respondents, and the Commission investigative attorney filed petitions for review of Order No. 11. Having examined the record of this investigation, including the ALJ's ID and the submissions of the parties, the Commission has determined to review and vacate the ALJ's ID. The issues raised by Changzhou's motion, including whether the importation of the finished product alone (sucralose) constitutes a violation of section 337 based on the '463, '969, and '551 patents, and the ID, including whether trace amounts of an intermediate product or catalyst in the imported product can constitute a violation of section 337, may be addressed in the final initial determination (or earlier, if appropriate). In addressing these issues, the parties and the ALJ should consider the following: 1. The amount of any subject product which has been or is currently being imported. 2. Whether there is a difference in effective scope between 35 U.S.C. 271(g) and 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(1)(B)(ii). Whether this question has been decided by *Kinik* v. *International Trade Commission* , 362 F.3d 1359, 1361-63 (Fed. Cir. 2004). 3. The language and legislative history of 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(1)(B)(ii) and the language and legislative history of former section 337a (former 19 U.S.C. 1337a). The statements in *Amgen* v. *ITC* , 902 F.2d 1532 (Fed. Cir. 1990), as to “covered” and that former section 337a was reenacted as section 337(a)(1)(B)(ii) without a change in scope. Any special rule of statutory interpretation that should be applied given that former section 337a was enacted in response to In re *Amtorg Trading Corp.* , 75 F.2d 826 (CCPA 1935). The processes and patents in In re *Amtorg Trading Corp.* and in *In re Northern Pigment Co.* , 71 F.2d 447 (CCPA 1934), and the underlying Commission proceedings. The processes and patents in all Commission and related court proceedings involving process patents and section 337 before and after the enactment of former section 337a. 4. The Supreme Court's recent decision in *Microsoft Corp.* v. *AT&T Corp.* , 550 U.S._(2007). 5. How the above cases may best be read in conjunction with each other. The Commission has also determined to grant the investigative attorney's motion for leave to file its petition for review out of time and to deny Tate & Lyle's motion for oral argument on review as moot. The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in section 210.43-45 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.43-45). By order of the Commission. Issued: September 24, 2007. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E7-19168 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-564] In the Matter of Certain Voltage Regulators, Components Thereof and Products Containing Same; Notice of Commission Final Determination of Violation of Section 337; Termination of Investigation; Issuance of Limited Exclusion Order AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined that there is a violation of 19 U.S.C. 1337 by Advanced Analogic Technologies, Inc. (“AATI”) of Sunnyvale, California in the above-captioned investigation, and has issued a limited exclusion order directed against products of respondent AATI. The investigation is terminated. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Frahm, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone

(202)205-3107. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone

(EDIS)at *http://edis.usitc.gov.* Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on

(202)205-1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This investigation was instituted on March 22, 2006, based on a complaint filed by Linear Technology Corporation (“Linear”) of Milpitas, California. The complaint, as supplemented, alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain voltage regulators, components thereof and products containing the same, by reason of infringement of various claims of United States Patent No. 6,411,531 (“the '531 patent”) and United States Patent No. 6,580,258 (“the '258 patent”). The complaint named AATI as the sole respondent. On May 22, 2007, the ALJ issued his final ID finding no violation of section 337. Specifically, he found that none of AATI's accused products directly infringe the asserted claims of the '258 patent, and that one accused product directly infringed claims 4 and 26 of the '531 patent. He found that no indirect infringement had occurred in connection with any of the asserted claims of either patent. As to validity, the ALJ determined that claim 35 of the '258 patent and claims 4, 9, and 26 of the '531 patent are invalid due to anticipation, rejecting other arguments of invalidity, unenforceability, and estoppel. The ALJ also determined that a domestic industry exists with regard to the '258 patent; but that there was no domestic industry with regard to the '531 patent, because of a failure to meet the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement. On May 30, 2007, the ALJ issued his Recommended Determination (“RD”) on remedy and bonding. Linear, AATI, and the Commission investigative attorney (“IA”) filed petitions for review of the ALJ's ID. On July 6, 2007, the Commission determined to extend the deadline for determining whether to review the subject final ID by fifteen

(15)days, *i.e.* , to July 24, 2007. On July 24, 2007, the Commission determined to review the final ID in part. Specifically, the Commission made the following determinations. With respect to the '258 patent, the Commission determined

(1)to review the ID concerning the issues of claim construction, infringement, and validity; and

(2)not to review the remainder of the ID as to the '258 patent. With respect to the '531 patent, the Commission determined

(1)to review the ID concerning the issue of whether asserted claim 9 of the '531 patent is invalid for anticipation by the Kase reference, and upon review to take no position as to that issue, and

(2)not to review the remainder of the ID as to the '531 patent. The Commission requested written submissions from the parties relating to the issues on review, and submissions on the appropriate remedy, whether the statutory public interest factors preclude issuance of that remedy, and the amount of bond to be imposed during the Presidential review period. Having examined the record of this investigation, including the ALJ's final ID, the Commission has determined to reverse-in-part the subject ID such that:

(i)The ALJ's construction of the terms in claims 2, 3, 34, and 35 of the '258 patent are modified;

(ii)the ALJ's conclusions on infringement of the '258 patent are reversed-in-part by reversing the ALJ's finding of no literal infringement with respect to the sleep mode claims (asserted claims 2, 3, and 34) only as to representative product AAT1143, and affirming the ALJ's finding of no infringement with respect to the reverse current claim (asserted claim 35); and

(iii)the ALJ's findings of validity of claims 2, 3, and 34 and of invalidity of claim 35 of the '258 patent are affirmed. The Commission determined not to reach the issue of indirect infringement. The Commission has determined that the appropriate form of relief is a limited exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry of voltage regulators that infringe one or more of claims 2, 3, and 34 of the '258 patent and that are manufactured by or on behalf of AATI, its affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, licensees, contractors, or other related business entities, or successors or assigns. The Commission further determined that the public interest factors enumerated in section 337(d)(1) (19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1)) do not preclude issuance of the limited exclusion order. Finally, the Commission determined that the amount of bond to permit temporary importation during the Presidential review period (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)) shall be in the amount of one hundred

(100)percent of the entered value of the articles that are subject to the order. The Commission's order was delivered to the President and the United States Trade Representative on the day of its issuance. The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in section 210.45 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.45). By order of the Commission. Issued: September 24, 2007. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E7-19123 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [USITC SE-07-019] Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting Notice Agency Holding the Meeting: United States International Trade Commission. Time and Date: October 5, 2007 at 11 a.m. Place: Room 101, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. Telephone:

(202)205-2000. Status: Open to the public. Matters to be Considered: 1. Agenda for future meetings: none. 2. Minutes. 3. Ratification List. 4. Inv. Nos. 731-TA-1124 and 1125 (Preliminary) (Electrolytic Manganese Dioxide from Australia and China)—briefing and vote. (The Commission is currently scheduled to transmit its determinations to the Secretary of Commerce on or before October 9, 2007; Commissioners' opinions are currently scheduled to be transmitted to the Secretary of Commerce on or before October 16, 2007.) 5. Outstanding action jackets: None. In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting. By order of the Commission. Issued: September 25, 2007. William R. Bishop, Hearings and Meetings Coordinator. [FR Doc. E7-19186 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employee Benefits Security Administration Advisory Council on Employee Welfare and Pension Benefit Plans Working Group on Financial Literacy, Working Group on Participant Benefit Statements, and Working Group on Fiduciary Responsibilities Updates and Revenue Sharing; Notice of Meeting Pursuant to the authority contained in Section 512 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1142, the Working Groups assigned by the Advisory Council on Employee Welfare and Pension Benefit Plans to study the issues of

(1)financial literacy,

(2)participant benefit statements, and

(3)fiduciary responsibilities updates and revenue sharing will hold public teleconference meetings on October 16, 2007. The sessions will take place in Room C5515A, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. The purpose of the open meetings is for each Working Group to discuss its report/recommendations for the Secretary of Labor. The meetings will run from 10 a.m. to approximately 4 p.m., starting with the Working Group on Financial Literacy, followed by the Working Group on Participant Benefit Statements, followed by the Working Group on Fiduciary Responsibilities Updates and Revenue Sharing. Organizations or members of the public wishing to submit a written statement pertaining to the topic may do so by submitting 25 copies on or before October 9, 2007 to Larry Good, Executive Secretary, ERISA Advisory Council, U.S. Department of Labor, Suite N-5623, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Statements also may be submitted electronically to *good.larry@dol.gov.* Statements received on or before October 9, 2007 will be included in the record of the meeting. Individuals or representatives of organizations wishing to address one or more of the Working Groups should forward their requests to the Executive Secretary or telephone

(202)693-8668. Oral presentations will be limited to 10 minutes, time permitting, but an extended statement may be submitted for the record. Individuals with disabilities who need special accommodations should contact Larry Good by October 9 at the address indicated. Signed at Washington, DC this 24th day of September, 2007. Bradford P. Campbell, Assistant Secretary, Employee Benefits Security Administration. [FR Doc. E7-19190 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-29-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-61,927] C-Tech Industries, A Subsidiary of Alfred Karcher GMBH and Co. KG Calumet, MI; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application dated September 5, 2007, a worker requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative determination regarding eligibility for workers and former workers of C-Tech Industries, A Subsidiary of Alfred Karcher GMBH & Co. KG, Calumet, Michigan (subject firm) to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance

(TAA)and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA). The negative determination applicable to workers of the subject firm was issued on August 14, 2007. The Department's Notice of determination was published in the **Federal Register** on August 30, 2007 (72 FR 50126). Workers at the subject firm produce automatic parts cleaners (parts washers). The petition, dated August 1, 2007, stated that the subject firm shifted production to a foreign country and that the subject firm will close in November 2007. The petition attachments stated that production of pressure washers at the C-Tech Industries, Camas, Washington plant shifted to an affiliated facility in Monterrey, Mexico, and that “C-Tech industries in Camas, Washington takes over all production of parts washers.” The investigation revealed that neither sales nor production of parts cleaners/washers at the subject firm decreased during the relevant period. Rather, sales and production levels at the subject firm increased in 2006 from 2005 levels, and increased during January through July 2007 from January through July 2006 levels. The investigation also revealed that the subject firm did not shift production of parts cleaners/washers abroad. Rather, the shift of production was to an affiliated, domestic facility. Therefore, the Department determined that neither Section 222(a)(2)(A) nor Section 222(a)(2)(B) was satisfied. The petitioner contends that “no automatic parts washers were manufactured in Mexico, but pressure washers are being manufactured in Mexico” and that it does not matter that “the manufacture of our specific product did not go to Mexico, because our company produces a family of products. Transfer of one product in the family, affects the other products in the family.” Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) reconsideration may be granted under the following circumstances:

(1)If it appears on the basis of facts not previously considered that the determination complained of was erroneous;

(2)If it appears that the determination complained of was based on a mistake in the determination of facts not previously considered; or

(3)If in the opinion of the Certifying Officer, a misinterpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of the decision. In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner did not provide any new facts or allege any mistake of facts. Rather, the petitioner alleges that the Department has misinterpreted the law—that the shift of production of pressure washers from C-Tech Industries, Camas, Washington, to Mexico is a basis for a certification of eligibility for workers and former workers of C-Tech Industries, A Subsidiary of Alfred Karcher GMBH & Co. KG, Calumet, Michigan to apply for TAA and ATAA. The statute requires that the shift of production abroad must be of an article that is like or directly competitive with those produced at the subject firm. Because pressure washers and automatic parts washers are not similar to each other and are not directly competitive with each other, the Department determines that the shift of pressure washers to Mexico cannot be the basis for certification of a worker group that produces parts washers. Conclusion After review of the application and investigative findings, I conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of the law or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of the Department of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the application is denied. Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of September 2007. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-19181 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-61,674] EGS Electrical Group, Sola/Hevi-Duty Division, Nashville, TN; Dismissal of Application for Reconsideration Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) an application for administrative reconsideration was filed with the Director of the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance for workers at EGS Electrical Group, Sola/Hevi-Duty Division, Nashville, Tennessee. The application did not contain new information supporting a conclusion that the determination was erroneous, and also did not provide a justification for reconsideration of the determination that was based on either mistaken facts or a misinterpretation of facts or of the law. Therefore, a letter of dismissal was issued, which constitutes a negative determination regarding the application for reconsideration. TA-W-61,674; EGS Electrical Group Sola/Hevi-Duty Division Nashville, Tennessee (September 4, 2007). Signed at Washington, DC this 21st day of September 2007. Ralph DiBattista, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-19178 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-61,671] Faradyne Motors, A Joint Venture of ITT Industries and Pentair, Incorporated, Formerly Known as Success Enterprises LLC, Including On-Site Leased Workers From Kelly Services, Newark, NY, Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on June 20, 2007, applicable to workers of Faradyne Motors, A Joint Venture of ITT Industries and Pentair, Inc., Newark, New York. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on July 9, 2007 (72 FR 37365). At the request of the company, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged in the production of motors for pumps. The subject firm originally named Success Enterprises LLC was renamed Faradyne Motors due to a corporate decision in 2006. The State agency reports that some workers wages at the subject firm are being reported under the Unemployment Insurance

(UI)tax account for Success Enterprises LLC, Newark, New York. Accordingly, the Department is amending the certification to properly reflect this matter. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of Faradyne Motors who were adversely affected by increased company imports following a shift in production to China. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-61,671 is hereby issued as follows: All workers of Faradyne Motors, A Joint Venture of ITT Industries and Pentair, Inc., formerly known as Success Enterprises LLC, including on-site leased workers from Kelly Services, Newark, New York, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after June 11, 2006, through June 20, 2009, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC this 24th day of September 2007. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-19177 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-62,183] Hartmann, Inc., Lebanon, TN; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation was initiated on September 21, 2007 in response to a worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Hartmann, Inc., Lebanon, Tennessee. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 24th day of September, 2007. Richard Church, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-19176 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-61,852] Schnadig Corporation, Montoursville, PA; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application dated September 3, 2007, a petitioner requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative determination regarding eligibility for workers and former workers of the subject firm to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA). The denial notice was signed on August 3, 2007 and published in the **Federal Register** on August 14, 2007 (72 FR 45451). Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) reconsideration may be granted under the following circumstances:

(1)If it appears on the basis of facts not previously considered that the determination complained of was erroneous;

(2)If it appears that the determination complained of was based on a mistake in the determination of facts not previously considered; or

(3)If in the opinion of the Certifying Officer, a mis-interpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of the decision. The TAA petition, which was filed on behalf of workers at Schnadig Corporation, Montoursville, Pennsylvania engaged in the production of lawn and garden products, was denied based on the findings that during the relevant time period, the subject company did not separate or threaten to separate a significant number or proportion of workers, as required by Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974. In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner alleges that because he was a part of the initially certified worker group and remained employed by the subject firm after all the production stopped and beyond the expiration date of the original TAA certification, he should be also eligible for TAA. The workers of the subject firm were previously certified eligible for TAA (TA-W-55,198). This certification expired on July 15, 2006. The investigation revealed that production at the subject firm ceased in August of 2004. When assessing eligibility for TAA, the Department exclusively considers the relevant employment data (for one year prior to the date of the petition and any imminent layoffs) for the facility where the petitioning worker group was employed. In this case, the employment since the expiration of the previous certification was considered. The subject firm did not separate or threaten to separate a significant number of proportion of workers as required by Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974. Significant number or proportion of the workers in a firm or appropriate subdivision means at least three workers in a workforce of fewer than 50 workers, five percent of the workers in a workforce of over 50 workers, or at least 50 workers. Moreover, in its investigation, the Department considers production that occurred one year prior to the date of the petition as required in the Trade Adjustment Assistance regulations. Thus the period ending in 2004 is outside of the relevant period as established by the current petition date of July 12, 2007. The investigation revealed that the subject facility did not manufacture articles since 2004 and workers of the subject firm were not engaged in production of an article or supporting production of the article during the relevant time period. The Department further found that no new information was provided to contradict the original negative findings. Conclusion After review of the application and investigative findings, I conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of the law or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of the Department of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the application is denied. Signed at Washington, DC, this 21st day of September, 2007. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-19179 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-61,864; TA-W-61,864C] Syroco, Inc., Baldwinsville, NY, Including an Employee Located in Houston, TX; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on July 27, 2007, applicable to workers of Syroco, Inc., Baldwinsville, New York. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on August 9, 2007 (72 FR 44865). At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. New information shows that a worker separation has occurred involving an employee of the Baldwinsville, New York facility of Syroco, Inc. located in Houston, Texas. Mr. John Minnelli provided sales support services for the production of plastic patio furniture that is produced at the Baldwinsville, New York location of the subject firm. Based on these findings, the Department is amending this certification to include an employee of the Baldwinsville, New York facility of Syroco, Inc., located in Houston, Texas. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of Syroco, Inc., Baldwinsville, New York who were adversely affected by increased customer imports. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-61,864 is hereby issued as follows: All workers of Syroco, Inc., Baldwinsville, New York (TA-W-61,864), including an employee in support of Syroco, Inc., Baldwinsville, New York located in Houston, Texas (TA-W-61,864C), who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after July 23, 2006, through July 27, 2009, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC this 24th day of September 2007. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-19180 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-286] Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC)is considering issuance of a revision of existing exemptions from Title 10 of the *Code of Federal Regulations* (10 CFR) part 50, appendix R, “Fire Protection Program for Nuclear Power Facilities Operating Prior to January 1, 1979,” for Fire Areas ETN-4 and PAB-2, issued to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the licensee), for operation of Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3 (IP3), located in Westchester County, NY. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would revise the January 7, 1987 safety evaluation

(SE)to reflect that the installed Hemyc electrical raceway fire barrier system (ERFBS) configurations provide either a 30-minute fire resistance rating, or in one case a 24-minute fire resistance rating, in lieu of the previously stated 1-hour fire resistance rating. The licensee states that a Hemyc ERFBS fire resistance rating will provide sufficient protection for the affected raceways, with adequate margin, to continue to meet the intent of the original requests for exemption and conclusions presented in the NRC's January 7, 1987, SE. The licensee concludes that the revised fire resistance rating of the Hemyc ERFBS does not reflect a reduction in overall fire safety, and presents no added challenge to the credited post-fire safe-shutdown capability which remains materially unchanged from the configuration originally described in previous letters and as credited in the January 7, 1987, SE. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated July 24, 2006, as supplemented by letters dated April 30, May 23, and August 16, 2007. The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed revision of existing exemptions from 10 CFR part 50, appendix R, is needed in response to NRC Information Notice 2005-07. The information notice provided licensees the details of Hemyc ERFBS full-scale fire tests conducted by the NRC's Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. The test results concluded that the Hemyc ERFBS does not provide the level of protection expected for a 1-hour rated fire barrier, as originally designed. The proposed revision to existing exemptions would revise the fire resistance rating of Hemyc ERFBS configurations. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has completed its SE of the proposed action and concludes that the configuration of the fire zones under review provide reasonable assurance that a severe fire is not plausible and the existing fire protection features are adequate. The details of the staff's SE will be provided in the exemptions that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the exemption. Based on the presence of redundant safe-shutdown trains, minimal fire hazards and combustibles, automatic cable tray fire suppression system, manual fire suppression features, fire barrier protection, existing Hemyc configuration, and the installed smoke detection system, the NRC staff finds that the use of this Hemyc fire barrier in these zones will not significantly increase the consequences from a fire in these fire zones. The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released off site. There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent released off site. There is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the “no-action” alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar. Alternative Use of Resources The action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for IP3, dated February, 1975. Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its stated policy, on February 13, 2007, the NRC staff consulted with the New York State official, Alyse Peterson of the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letter dated July 24, 2006, Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) accession number ML062140057, as supplemented on April 30, 2007, ADAMS accession number ML071280504, May 23, 2007, ADAMS accession number ML071520177, and August 16, 2007, ADAMS accession number ML072400369. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.* Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or send an e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of September 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. John P. Boska, Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I-1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E7-19245 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Proposed Collection; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC 20549-0213 *Extension:* Form F-4; OMB Control No. 3235-0325; SEC File No. 270-288. Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is soliciting comments on the collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this existing collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget for extension and approval. Form F-4 (17 CFR 239.34) is used by foreign issuers to register securities in business combinations, reorganizations and exchange offers pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a *et seq.* ). The information collected is intended to ensure that the information required to be filed by the Commission permits verification of compliance with securities law requirements and assures the public availability of such information. Form F-4 takes approximately 1,447 hours per response and is filed by approximately 68 respondents. We estimate that 25% of the 1,447 hours per response (361.75 hours) is prepared by the registrant for a total annual reporting burden of 24,599 hours (361.75 hours per response x 68 responses). The remaining 75% of the burden hours is attributed to outside cost. Written comments are invited on:

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

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

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this publication. Please direct your written comments to R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312; or send an e-mail to: *PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov.* Dated: September 24, 2007. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19185 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. IC-27976; 812-13417] WisdomTree Investments, Inc., et al.; Notice of Application September 21, 2007. AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”). ACTION: Notice of application to amend a prior order under section 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Act”) for an exemption from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d), 22(e), and 24(d) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act, under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act, and under section 12(d)(1)(J) for an exemption from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act. Summary of Application: Applicants request an order (“Order”) to amend a prior order that permits:

(a)An open-end management investment company, whose series track the performance of certain domestic and international equity securities indexes developed by the parent company of the series' investment adviser, to issue shares (“Shares”) redeemable only in large aggregations;

(b)secondary market transactions in Shares to occur at negotiated prices;

(c)dealers to sell Shares to purchasers in the secondary market unaccompanied by a prospectus when prospectus delivery is not required by the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”);

(d)certain affiliated persons of the series to deposit securities into, and receive securities from, the series in connection with the purchase and redemption of aggregations of the series' Shares;

(e)under certain circumstances, the series that track certain foreign equity securities indexes to pay redemption proceeds more than seven days after the tender of Shares; and

(f)certain management investment companies and unit investment trusts outside of the same group of investment companies as the series to acquire Shares (the “Prior Order”). 1 Applicants seek to amend the Prior Order in order to offer additional series based on certain fixed income securities indexes (the “New Funds”). In addition, the Order would delete a condition related to future relief in the Prior Order. 1 WisdomTree Investments, Inc., *et al.* , Investment Company Act Release Nos. 27324 (May 18, 2006) (notice) and 27391 (June 12, 2006) (order). Applicants: WisdomTree Investments, Inc. (“WTI”), WisdomTree Asset Management, Inc. (the “Advisor”), and WisdomTree Trust (the “Trust”). Filing Dates: The application was filed on August 13, 2007 and amended on September 19, 2007. Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on October 16, 2007, and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary. ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants: 48 Wall Street, Suite 1100, New York, NY 10005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Courtney S. Thornton, Senior Counsel, at

(202)551-6812, or Mary Kay Frech, Branch Chief, at

(202)551-6821 (Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company Regulation). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee at the Commission's Public Reference Branch, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-0102 (tel. 202-551-5850). Applicants' Representations 1. The Trust, a Delaware statutory trust registered under the Act as an open-end management investment company, is organized as a series fund with multiple series (the “Equity Funds”). WTI, a Delaware corporation with its principal offices in New York City, is the sole shareholder of the Advisor. WTI has developed and maintains the proprietary indexes that serve or will serve as the basis for the Equity Funds and the New Funds. The Advisor is a Delaware corporation that is registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”). The Advisor serves as investment adviser to the Equity Funds, and the Advisor, or an entity controlled by or under common control with the Advisor, will serve as investment adviser to the New Funds and any future series of the Trust (“Future Funds”). The Advisor and the Trust intend to hire one or more subadvisers (“Subadvisers”) for the New Funds, each of which will be registered as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act and will not otherwise be an affiliated person, or an affiliated person of an affiliated person, of the Trust, the Advisor, or WTI. ALPS Distributors, Inc. (“Distributor”), a broker-dealer registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), acts as distributor and principal underwriter of the Equity Funds and may perform such services for the New Funds and any Future Funds. 2. The Trust is currently permitted to offer the Equity Funds, which track equity securities indexes developed by WTI, in reliance on the Prior Order. Applicants seek to amend the Prior Order to permit the Trust to offer the New Funds, as well as Future Funds (together with the Equity Funds and the New Funds, the “Funds”) that are advised by the Advisor or an entity controlled by or under common control with the Advisor and that comply with the terms and conditions of the Prior Order, as modified by the requested relief. 3. The investment objective of each New Fund will be to provide investment results that correspond generally to the price and yield performance of its underlying index (“Underlying Index”) by investing in a portfolio of securities generally consisting of the component securities (“Component Securities”) of the Underlying Index. 2 The Underlying Index for each New Fund tracks fixed income securities and will be rebalanced monthly. 3 The Underlying Indexes for the New Funds, as well as the Underlying Indexes for the Equity Funds, have been created by WTI, an affiliated person, as defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Act, of the Advisor and the Trust. Future Funds may be based on Underlying Indexes created, compiled, sponsored, or maintained by WTI or another index provider that is controlled by or under common control with WTI (a “WTI Index Provider”) or on Underlying Indexes created, compiled, sponsored, or maintained by an entity that is not an affiliated person, or an affiliated person of an affiliated person, of the Fund, the Advisor, the Distributor, promoter, or any Subadviser to a Fund (a “Non-Affiliated Index Provider”). Because Funds based on Underlying Indexes created by a WTI Index Provider could introduce potential conflicts of interest, the Prior Order contains certain representations and undertakings relating to the transparency of the methodology for those Underlying Indexes, and the establishment of certain policies and procedures to limit communication between index personnel and employees of the Advisor and any Subadviser. Applicants believe that these conflicts of interest do not exist where the index creator is a Non-Affiliated Index Provider. Applicants therefore seek to amend the Prior Order to provide that the relevant representations and undertakings in the application for the Prior Order should not apply to a Fund based on an Underlying Index created by a Non-Affiliated Index Provider. 2 The Underlying Indexes for the New Funds are the WisdomTree International Government ex Japan Bond Index and the WisdomTree Government Strategies Index. 3 The application for the Prior Order specified that Underlying Indexes created, compiled, sponsored, or maintained by a WTI Index Provider (as defined below) would be reconstituted no more frequently than quarterly. Applicants seek to amend the Prior Order to allow such Underlying Indexes to be reconstituted as frequently as monthly, which applicants indicate is a common methodology for fixed income indexes. 4. The applicants state that the Component Securities of the WisdomTree International Government ex Japan Bond Index include liquid investment grade government bonds denominated in developed market currencies other than the U.S. dollar and the Japanese yen, with a primary focus on fixed-rate coupon bonds in developed markets maturing between 3 and 10 years, and exclude securities with embedded options, floating-rate coupons, and zero coupons. The Component Securities of the WisdomTree Government Strategies Index include U.S. Treasury securities, obligations of U.S. government agencies and quasi-government corporations, and U.S. mortgage-backed securities. 4 Each New Fund may fully replicate its Underlying Index, but each New Fund currently intends to use a “representative sampling” strategy. Under a representative sampling strategy, a New Fund will hold a basket of the Component Securities of its Underlying Index, but may not hold all of the Component Securities of its Underlying Index. Each New Fund generally will invest at least 80% of its total assets in the Component Securities of the relevant Underlying Index. However, a New Fund may also at times invest up to 20 percent of its total assets in certain futures, options and swap contracts, and cash and cash equivalents, including money market funds, as well as securities not included in its Underlying Index, but which the Advisor believes will help the New Fund to track its Underlying Index. At all times, a New Fund and any Future Fund will hold in the aggregate at least 80% of its total assets in Component Securities and investments that have economic characteristics that are substantially identical to the economic characteristics of the Component Securities of its Underlying Index. 5 Applicants expect that each New Fund will have a tracking error relative to the performance of its respective Underlying Index of no more than 5 percent. 4 The Trust intends to substitute a cash-in-lieu amount to replace any Deposit Security or Fund Security (each as defined below) that is a “to-be-announced transaction” or “TBA Transaction.” A TBA Transaction is a method of trading mortgage-backed securities where the buyer and seller agree upon general trade parameters such as agency, settlement date, par amount, and price. The actual pools delivered are determined two days prior to settlement date. The amount of substituted cash in the case of TBA Transactions will be equivalent to the value of the TBA Transaction listed as a Deposit Security or Fund Security. 5 Applicants anticipate that investments that have economic characteristics substantially identical to those of the Component Securities of an Underlying Index will encompass securities such as depository receipts based on Component Securities and TBA Transactions. 5. Applicants state that the New Funds will comply with the federal securities laws in accepting a deposit of a portfolio of securities designated by the Advisor to correspond generally to the price and yield performance of the New Fund's Underlying Index (“Deposit Securities”) and satisfying redemptions with portfolio securities of the New Funds (“Fund Securities”), including that the Deposit Securities and Fund Securities are sold in transactions that would be exempt from registration under the Securities Act. 6 6 In accepting Deposit Securities and satisfying redemptions with Fund Securities that are restricted securities eligible for resale pursuant to rule 144A under the Securities Act, the New Funds will comply with the conditions of rule 144A, including in satisfying redemptions with such rule 144A eligible restricted Fund Securities. The prospectus for each New Fund will also state that an authorized participant that is not a “Qualified Institutional Buyer,” as defined in rule 144A under the Securities Act, will not be able to receive, as part of a redemption, restricted securities eligible for resale under rule 144A. 6. Applicants state that the New Funds will operate in a manner identical to the operation of the Equity Funds under the Prior Order, except as specifically noted by applicants (and summarized in this notice), and will comply with all of the terms, provisions and conditions of the Prior Order, as amended by the present application. Applicants believe that the requested relief continues to meet the necessary exemptive standards. Future Relief 7. Applicants also seek to amend the Prior Order to modify the terms under which the Trust may offer Future Funds. The Prior Order is currently subject to a condition that does not permit applicants to register the shares of any Future Fund by means of filing a post-effective amendment to the Trust's registration statement or by any other means, unless applicants have requested and received with respect to such Future Fund, either exemptive relief from the Commission or a no-action letter from the Division of Investment Management of the Commission, or if the Future Fund could be listed on a national securities exchange (“Exchange”) without the need for a filing pursuant to rule 19b-4 under the Exchange Act. 8. The order would amend the Prior Order to delete this condition. Any Future Fund will

(a)be advised by the Advisor or an entity controlled by or under common control with the Advisor;

(b)track Underlying Indexes that are created, compiled, sponsored or maintained by a WTI Index Provider or a Non-Affiliated Index Provider; and

(c)comply with the respective terms and conditions of the Prior Order, as amended by the present application. 9. Applicants believe that the modification of the future relief available under the Prior Order would be consistent with sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act and that granting the requested relief will facilitate the timely creation of Future Funds and the commencement of secondary market trading of such Future Funds by removing the need to seek additional exemptive relief. Applicants submit that the terms and conditions of the Prior Order have been appropriate for the existing series of the Trust and would remain appropriate for Future Funds. Applicants also submit that tying exemptive relief under the Act to the ability of a Future Fund to be listed on an Exchange without the need for a rule 19b-4 filing under the Exchange Act is not necessary to meet the standards under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act. Applicants' Conditions Applicants agree that any Order granting the requested relief will be subject to the same conditions as those imposed by the Prior Order, except for condition 1 to the Prior Order, which will be deleted. For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, pursuant to delegated authority. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19148 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Investment Company Act Release No. 27975; 812-13382] ProShares Trust, et al.; Notice of Application September 21, 2007. AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”). ACTION: Notice of an application to amend a prior order under section 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Act”) granting an exemption from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d) and 24(d) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act, and under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and (a)(2) of the Act. *Applicants:* ProShares Trust (“Trust”), ProShare Advisors LLC (“Adviser”), and SEI Investments Distribution Company (“Distributor”). *Summary of Application:* Applicants request an order to amend a prior order that permits:

(a)Series of an open-end management investment company (“Initial Funds”) to issue shares of limited redeemability;

(b)secondary market transactions in the shares to occur at negotiated prices;

(c)dealers to sell the shares to purchasers in the secondary market unaccompanied by a prospectus, when prospectus delivery is not required by the Securities Act of 1933; and

(d)certain affiliated persons of the Initial Funds to deposit securities into, and receive securities from, the Initial Funds in connection with the purchase and redemption of aggregations of the shares (“Prior Order”). 1 Applicants seek to amend the Prior Order to permit certain new series (“Additional Funds” and, together with the Initial Funds, the “Funds”) to be offered using domestic equity securities indices different than those permitted under the Prior Order and certain international equity securities indices and debt securities indices (collectively, “New Underlying Indices”). 1 ProShares Trust, *et al.* , Investment Company Act Release Nos. 27323 (May 18, 2006) (notice) and 27394 (June 13, 2006) (order), as subsequently amended by ProShares Trust, *et al.* , Investment Company Act Release Nos. 27609 (Dec. 22, 2006) (notice) and 27666 (Jan. 18, 2007) (order). *Filing Dates:* The application was filed on May 11, 2007, and amended on May 30, 2007, September 7, 2007 and September 20, 2007. *Hearing or Notification of Hearing:* An order granting the requested relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on October 16, 2007, and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary. ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants: ProShares Trust and ProShare Advisors LLC, 7501 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1000, Bethesda, MD 20814; SEI Investments Distribution Company, One Freedom Valley Drive, Oaks, PA 19456. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shannon Conaty, Senior Counsel, at

(202)551-6827, or Julia Kim Gilmer, Branch Chief, at

(a)correspond to the return of certain domestic equity securities indices;

(b)provide 125%, 150% or 200% of the return of certain domestic equity securities indices; or

(c)move in the opposite direction of the performance of certain domestic equity securities indices in multiples of 100%, 125%, 150% or 200% (“Inverse Funds”). Applicants seek to amend the Prior Order to permit the Additional Funds to be offered using New Underlying Indices. Applicants seek to amend the Prior Order to permit the Trust to offer Funds that seek daily investment results, before fees and expenses, that correspond to twice (200%) the return of, the inverse return of, and twice the inverse (double the opposite) return of the: NASDAQ Biotechnology Index, Dow Jones Select Biotechnology Index and Dow Jones Select Telecommunications Index. Applicants also intend to offer Funds that seek daily investment results, before fees and expenses, that correspond to the inverse return of and twice the inverse (double the opposite) return of the: MSCI Emerging Markets Index, MSCI Japan Index, MSCI EAFE Index, FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index, Lehman Brothers 7-10 Year U.S. Treasury Index, Lehman Brothers 20+ Year U.S. Treasury Index, iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index, and iBoxx $ Liquid High Yield Index (collectively, the “New Inverse Funds”). Consistent with the operations of the Inverse Funds that were the subject of the Prior Order, the New Inverse Funds will not hold any equity securities. All Additional Funds will operate in a manner identical to the Initial Funds. No creator, provider or compiler of a New Underlying Index is or will be an affiliated person, as defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Act, or an affiliated person of an affiliated person, of the Trust, a promoter, the Adviser, any subadviser to any Fund, or the Distributor. 3. Applicants state that the Additional Funds will be offered pursuant to the same terms and provisions contained in the application for the Prior Order, except as expressly modified by this application. Applicants agree that the amended order will be subject to the same conditions as those imposed by the Prior Order. Applicants believe that the requested relief continues to meet the necessary exemptive standards. For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, pursuant to delegated authority. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19149 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56509] Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Order Granting Registration of Fitch, Inc. as a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization September 24, 2007. Fitch, Inc., a credit rating agency, furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) an application for registration as a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (“NRSRO”) under Section 15E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(v)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act. The Commission finds that the application furnished by Fitch, Inc. is in the form required by Exchange Act Section 15E, Exchange Act Rule 17g-1 (17 CFR 240.17g-1), and Form NRSRO (17 CFR 249b.300) and contains the information described in subparagraph

(B)of Section 15E(a)(1) of the Exchange Act. Based on the application, the Commission finds that the requirements of Section 15E of the Exchange Act are satisfied. Accordingly, *It is ordered,* under paragraph (a)(2)(A) of Section 15E of the Exchange Act, that the registration of Fitch, Inc. with the Commission as an NRSRO under Section 15E of the Exchange Act for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(v)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act is granted. By the Commission. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19171 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No.34-56507] Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Order Granting Registration of A.M. Best Company, Inc. as a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization September 24, 2007. A.M. Best Company, Inc., a credit rating agency, furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) an application for registration as a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (“NRSRO”) under Section 15E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(iv)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act. The Commission finds that the application furnished by A.M. Best Company, Inc. is in the form required by Exchange Act Section 15E, Exchange Act Rule 17g-1 (17 CFR 240.17g-1), and Form NRSRO (17 CFR 249b.300) and contains the information described in subparagraph

(B)of Section 15E(a)(1) of the Exchange Act. Based on the application, the Commission finds that the requirements of Section 15E of the Exchange Act are satisfied. Accordingly, *It is ordered,* under paragraph (a)(2)(A) of Section 15E of the Exchange Act, that the registration of A.M. Best Company, Inc. with the Commission as an NRSRO under Section 15E of the Exchange Act for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(iv)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act is granted. By the Commission. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19169 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56508] Securities Exchange Act Of 1934; Order Granting Registration Of DBRS Limited As A Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization September 24, 2007. DBRS Limited, a credit rating agency, furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) an application for registration as a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (“NRSRO”) under Section 15E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(v)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act. The Commission finds that the application furnished by DBRS Limited is in the form required by Exchange Act Section 15E, Exchange Act Rule 17g-1 (17 CFR 240.17g-1), and Form NRSRO (17 CFR 249b.300) and contains the information described in subparagraph

(B)of Section 15E(a)(1) of the Exchange Act. Based on the application, the Commission finds that the requirements of Section 15E of the Exchange Act are satisfied. Accordingly, *It is ordered* , under paragraph (a)(2)(A) of Section 15E of the Exchange Act, that the registration of DBRS Limited with the Commission as an NRSRO under Section 15E of the Exchange Act for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(v)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act is granted. By the Commission. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19170 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 56510] Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Order Granting Registration of Japan Credit Rating Agency, LTD., as a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization September 24, 2007. Japan Credit Rating Agency, Ltd., a credit rating agency, furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) an application for registration as a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (“NRSRO”) under Section 15E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(v)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act. The Commission finds that the application furnished by Japan Credit Rating Agency, Ltd. is in the form required by Exchange Act Section 15E, Exchange Act Rule 17g-1 (17 CFR 240.17g-1), and Form NRSRO (17 CFR 249b.300) and contains the information described in subparagraph

(B)of Section 15E(a)(1) of the Exchange Act. Based on the application, the Commission finds that the requirements of Section 15E of the Exchange Act are satisfied. Accordingly, *It is ordered,* under paragraph (a)(2)(A) of Section 15E of the Exchange Act, that the registration of Japan Credit Rating Agency, Ltd., with the Commission as an NRSRO under Section 15E of the Exchange Act for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(v)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act is granted. By the Commission. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19174 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 56511/September 24, 2007] Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Order Granting Registration of Moody's Investors Service, Inc. as a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization Moody's Investors Service, Inc., a credit rating agency, furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) an application for registration as a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (“NRSRO”) under Section 15E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(v)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act. The Commission finds that the application furnished by Moody's Investors Service, Inc. is in the form required by Exchange Act Section 15E, Exchange Act Rule 17g-1 (17 CFR 240.17g-1), and Form NRSRO (17 CFR 249b.300) and contains the information described in subparagraph

(B)of Section 15E(a)(1) of the Exchange Act. Based on the application, the Commission finds that the requirements of Section 15E of the Exchange Act are satisfied. Accordingly, *It is ordered* , under paragraph (a)(2)(A) of Section 15E of the Exchange Act, that the registration of Moody's Investors Service, Inc. with the Commission as an NRSRO under Section 15E of the Exchange Act for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(v)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act is granted. By the Commission. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19172 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 56512] Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Order Granting Registration of Rating and Investment Information, Inc., as a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization September 24, 2007. Rating and Investment Information, Inc., a credit rating agency, furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) an application for registration as a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (“NRSRO”) under Section 15E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(v)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act. The Commission finds that the application furnished by Rating and Investment Information, Inc. is in the form required by Exchange Act Section 15E, Exchange Act Rule 17g-1 (17 CFR 240.17g-1), and Form NRSRO (17 CFR 249b.300) and contains the information described in subparagraph

(B)of Section 15E(a)(1) of the Exchange Act. Based on the application, the Commission finds that the requirements of Section 15E of the Exchange Act are satisfied. Accordingly, *It is ordered* , under paragraph (a)(2)(A) of Section 15E of the Exchange Act, that the registration of Rating and Investment Information, Inc., with the Commission as an NRSRO under Section 15E of the Exchange Act for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(v)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act is granted. By the Commission. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19173 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56513/September 24, 2007] Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Order Granting Registration of Standard & Poor's Ratings Services as a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization Standard & Poor's Ratings Services, a credit rating agency, furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) an application for registration as a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (“NRSRO”) under Section 15E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(v)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act. The Commission finds that the application furnished by Standard & Poor's Ratings Services is in the form required by Exchange Act Section 15E, Exchange Act Rule 17g-1 (17 CFR 240.17g-1), and Form NRSRO (17 CFR 249b.300) and contains the information described in subparagraph

(B)of Section 15E(a)(1) of the Exchange Act. Based on the application, the Commission finds that the requirements of Section 15E of the Exchange Act are satisfied. Accordingly, *It is ordered,* under paragraph (a)(2)(A) of Section 15E of the Exchange Act, that the registration of Standard & Poor's Ratings Services with the Commission as an NRSRO under Section 15E of the Exchange Act for the classes of credit ratings described in clauses

(i)through

(v)of Section 3(a)(62)(B) of the Exchange Act is granted. By the Commission. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19175 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56498; File No. SR-Amex-2007-103] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating To Quoting Obligations in Long Term Options September 21, 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 September 17, 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 Amex. 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 rendered 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 Amex proposes to limit the expirations that are included in a Registered Options Trader's (“ROTs”), Supplemental Registered Options Trader's (“SROTs”), and Remote Registered Options Trader's (“RROTs”) minimum quoting requirements. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the 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, the 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 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 Amex Rule 958-ANTE sets forth an ROT's list of obligations, including the maintenance of minimum quoting requirements. As part of its quote mitigation procedures, the Exchange is proposing to exclude options with a series of more than nine months until expiration from an ROT's, SROT's, and RROT's minimum quoting requirements. The Exchange believes that this amendment will reduce market data traffic because ROTs, SROTs and RROTs will no longer be required to comply with the minimum quoting requirements in the less actively traded series (far out months, etc.). Amex Rule 958-ANTE (h)(iii) provides that any ROT who transacts more than 20% of their contract volume in an assigned option class electronically and not through open outcry, measured over a calendar quarter, shall, commencing the next calendar quarter, be obligated to maintain continuous two-sided quotations for at least ten contracts in a certain percentage of series in that option class. The percentage of series an ROT is obligated to quote varies depending on the amount of contract volume executed electronically on the Exchange in that option class. The Exchange has established for each option class the percentage of series that must be continuously quoted by those ROTs based upon the Exchange's percentage of electronic contract volume. 5 5 *See* Amex Rule 958-ANTE (h)(iii). Amex Rules 993-ANTE and 994-ANTE provide that SROTs and RROTs must provide continuous electronic two-sided quotations in accordance with the parameters set forth in Amex Rule 958-ANTE

(c)in at least 60% of the series of their assigned classes. To reduce the number of quotations submitted by ROTs, SROTs and RROTs, the Exchange is proposing to exclude options with a series of more than nine months until expiration, which are known as LEAPS (Long-term Equity Anticipation Securities), from an ROT's, SROT's and RROT's minimum quoting requirements. 6 The effect of this is to relax their continuous quoting obligations, and ultimately the number of quotes they are required to submit, because the continuous quoting obligations in Amex Rules 958-ANTE, 993-ANTE, and 994-ANTE will not apply to those series of options classes that have a time to expiration of more than nine months. 6 Specialists will still be required to quote in LEAPS as they are required to disseminate quotations in all series of the option classes they trade. *See* Amex Rule 950-ANTE(l). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent 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 it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative 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. 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 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 by the Exchange. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 9 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 10 because the foregoing proposed rule does not:

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

(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 10 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. 11 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. 12 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 the public interest because such waiver will allow the Exchange to immediately implement a quote mitigation strategy that it believes should help to mitigate the Exchange's quote message traffic and capacity. In addition, the proposed rule change does not present any novel regulatory issues because it is substantially similar to recently approved rules on the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. and the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated. 13 For these reasons, the Commission designates the proposal to be operative upon filing with the Commission. 14 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires the self-regulatory organization to give the Commission notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. Amex has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement. 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 13 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 55689 (May 1, 2007), 72 FR 26192 (May 8, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2007-36) and 55853 (June 4, 2007), 72 FR 32151 (June 11, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-56). 14 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 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. 15 15 *See* 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-2007-103 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-2007-103. 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 St., 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 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-2007-103 and should be submitted on or before October 19, 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. E7-19160 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56495; File No. SR-Amex-2007-105] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Require That the AEMI Trading Platform Function To Assure Compliance With the Exchange's Priority and Parity Rules September 21, 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 September 18, 2007, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared substantially by the Amex. The Amex has designated the proposed rule change as one constituting a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule under section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change In compliance with a Commission order in a recent administrative proceeding, 5 the Amex proposes to adopt new Commentary .06 to Amex Rule 126-AEMI, “Precedence of Bids and Offers,” to provide that the Amex's new hybrid trading platform for equity products and exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”), designated as AEMI SM (“AEMI”), shall function at all times in a manner that assures compliance with the Amex's priority and parity rules. In particular, AEMI shall systemically prevent a Specialist attempting to execute his/her proprietary order from trading ahead of a customer order in the Specialist's possession or for which the Specialist otherwise has responsibility and which customer order could trade in place of some or all of the Specialist's side of the trade, *unless* the trade meets a specified exemption in the Exchange's rules. 5 *See* In the Matter of American Stock Exchange LLC, Order Instituting Administrative and Cease-and-Desist Proceedings, Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions, a Censure, and a Cease-and-Desist Order Pursuant to Sections 19(h)(1) and 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55507 (March 22, 2007) (Administrative Proceeding File No. 3-12594) (“Settlement Order”). The proposed rule change is available at the Amex, in the Commission's Public Reference Room, and on the Amex's Web site at *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, the 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 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 is proposing to add to its AEMI rules a provision requiring that the AEMI platform function at all times in a manner that assures compliance with the Exchange's priority and parity rules. More specifically, AEMI must ensure that, when a Specialist is in the process of executing his/her proprietary order while a customer order in the Specialist's possession or for which the Specialist otherwise has responsibility could trade in place of some or all of the Specialist's side of the trade, AEMI will systemically

(i)prevent the reporting of the execution, and

(ii)allocate the appropriate portion of the Specialist's trade to the customer order, *unless* the trade meets a specified exemption in the Exchange's rules and has thereby been programmed into the AEMI system as an allowable trade. All of the Exchange's priority and parity rules for equity products and ETFs are pre-programmed into AEMI and may not be disabled or otherwise changed by the Specialist or any other market participant. The provision with the foregoing requirements is being added as new Commentary .06 to Amex Rule 126-AEMI. 6 6 As noted above, the Amex is making this rule filing in compliance with the Settlement Order. *See* note 5, *supra* . The Amex has withdrawn its original filing with respect to this proposed rule change, SR-Amex-2007-50, which the Amex filed on May 21, 2007, and is replacing it with the current rule filing. The Exchange believes that the new AEMI platform, as currently operational, does in fact meet the foregoing requirements. 7 The implementation of AEMI, whose operation has been described in detail in previous filings, goes well beyond simply adding enhancements to the Amex's legacy trading systems to bring the Exchange into compliance. AEMI is an entirely new trading platform whose design and operation will, in transactions involving equity products and ETFs, 8 prevent Specialists from violating the Exchange's priority and parity rules in ways that the Amex's legacy systems could not. 7 There are two exceptions to this statement that the Amex has recently become aware of and that the Amex is working to correct in the near future. First, there are certain circumstances immediately following the opening or reopening pair-off in an equity or ETF under which the Specialist's quotation could be routed out to execute against a better priced protected quotation of another market ahead of a marketable customer order on the AEMI Book. Secondly, the Exchange's rules provide for a post-opening pair-off of marketable orders held in the message queue during the opening pair-off. This post-opening pair-off is handled by the AEMI system in such a way that it could result in the Specialist's quote being executed ahead of marketable customer orders on the AEMI Book. Although the Amex does not believe that either of these situations occurs with any frequency and the Specialist has no ability to direct their occurrence, the Exchange is currently working to implement in a timely manner the software changes necessary to correct these system flaws and will make an additional rule filing at the time that the corrections become effective. 8 Options are not traded on AEMI at this time. Under normal circumstances, when auto-ex is enabled in AEMI, incoming orders are executed against resting orders on the AEMI Book in accordance with the Exchange's priority and parity rules that are pre-programmed into the system. The system also permits manual trades to occur when auto-ex is enabled in the form of negotiated trades (between two crowd members), crosses in the crowd (one crowd member), and auctions (between multiple crowd members). When auto-ex is disabled, only auctions performed by the Specialists may occur ( *see* discussion of auctions below). The following illustrates the steps involved in negotiated trades, which have been relatively infrequent during the first few months that AEMI has been in effect. Suppose two Floor Brokers negotiate the terms of a trade between them while standing in the crowd. They would then verbally request that the Specialist enter the trade into AEMI. Within a few seconds, the Specialist would enter the badge identifiers of both Floor Brokers along with the terms of the trade (price and number of shares) into AEMI and click the “GO” button, during which time the two Floor Brokers would be physically present. It would be very obvious to these Floor Brokers, and to other crowd members as well, if the Specialist were to attempt to delay the entry of the order into AEMI or take other action that would disadvantage the parties to the negotiated trade and benefit the Specialist ( *e.g.* , moving his quotation). AEMI would automatically validate that the trade meets all required parameters ( *e.g.* , the trade price relative to the Amex Published Quote (“APQ”)) and, if so, accepts the trade into AEMI for execution. If the price of the trade is outside the national best bid or offer (“NBBO”), then intermarket sweep orders are immediately generated as required to execute against the protected quotations of away markets, while the balance of the order prints on the Amex and is allocated based on the Exchange's priority and parity rules. In that allocation, electronic orders and quotations that already exist on the AEMI Book at the price of the verbal trade have priority over the verbal trade that has just been accepted by AEMI for execution. Following the allocation, AEMI will send a trade execution message to each Floor Broker's hand held terminal (“HHT”) with the number of shares allocated to the Floor Broker at the trade price. Each Floor Broker would then further allocate those shares among the customer orders in his/her HHT. The following example illustrates the automatic application of the priority and parity rules by AEMI in a situation involving a manual trade with auto-ex enabled. As provided in Rule 128B—AEMI, “Auction Trades,” a negotiated trade may take place only at or inside the APQ. A negotiated trade that takes place at the APQ automatically incorporates electronic orders and quotes already resident on the AEMI Book at the time of the print, because these orders and quotes have priority and standing over the verbal trade. For example, assume that the APQ for an ETF is 34.55 x 35.10 and the AEMI Book has 4,000 shares on the bid side at that price, comprised of a customer order for 3,000 shares and the Specialist's bid for 1,000 shares. Assume that the customer order is a reserve order with a display size of 1,000 shares. Therefore, the size of the APQ on the bid side is 2,000 shares (the visible size of the reserve order and the Specialist's bid). Two Floor Brokers in the crowd wish to transact a negotiated trade for 5,000 shares at the price of 34.55, a price that has been agreed to verbally and that must be entered into AEMI by the Specialist in order for the trade to represent a valid contract. When the Specialist prints the trade for the two Floor Brokers, the electronic orders at the price take priority and the seller will sell 3,000 shares to the customer reserve order (displayed and non-displayed liquidity), 1,000 shares to the Specialist's quote, and 1,000 shares to the contra party in the negotiated trade. The remaining 4,000 shares on the buy side of the negotiated trade expire. The 4,000 shares on the AEMI Book, including the Specialist's quote, take priority at the price because they represent passive liquidity already resident on the AEMI Book and the Specialist is not agent to the negotiated trade in the crowd. Similarly, a cross from a crowd member must interact with orders on the AEMI Book, with the exception of crosses that meet the size and value requirements outlined in Commentary .01 and .02 of Rule 126—AEMI, in which case they do not interact with orders already on the AEMI Book. Next, suppose that the negotiated trade in the crowd in the foregoing example is for only 1,000 shares. The priority and parity rules for ETFs in AEMI will automatically result in the seller executing all 1,000 shares against the displayed size of the customer reserve order, which has a higher priority than the Specialist's quote. On the other hand, if the negotiated trade had been for 2,000 shares, 1,000 shares would have executed against the displayed size of the customer reserve order and 1,000 shares would have executed against the Specialist's quote, because the latter has a higher priority than the replenished reserve size (which is not visible liquidity). This is an example of a specified exemption in the Exchange's priority and parity rules that allows the Specialist to have a higher priority than part of a customer order. 9 9 In addition to executing ahead of the replenished reserve size of customer reserve orders for both ETFs and equities, as provided by the Amex's priority and parity rules, the Specialist's quotation may also be executed, for both ETFs and equities under those rules, ahead of a percentage order that is a customer order and is elected by a trade event. In addition, for equities only, the Specialist's quotation may be executed ahead of some customer orders pursuant to the Amex priority and parity rules (and depending on whether public orders are also involved) under the following circumstances:

(i)Parity allocation takes place among the Specialist's quotation in parity and the visible size of crowd customer orders in parity; and

(ii)the Specialist's quotation and the visible size of certain crowd customer orders not in parity are executed based on time priority. *See* Amex Rule 126—AEMI

(b)and (d). Finally, a Specialist may conduct an auction when auto-ex is either enabled or disabled. In both circumstances, resting orders on the AEMI Book are automatically incorporated into the pair-off, and the parity and priority rules referred to above are systematically applied. When conducting a pair-off, the Specialist has agency responsibility to orders on the AEMI Book and may participate at the pair-off price but only after all other orders at the pair-off price trade first. In the circumstance when auto-ex is disabled, an auction pair-off would be conducted to resolve any imbalance and re-enable auto-ex. (If there were no imbalance, auto-ex could be re-enabled based simply on a quotation.) The only auction trade that can take place in this situation is one to resolve the imbalance. During the time that auto-ex is disabled, incoming orders, amendments, and cancellations continue to enter the AEMI Book and members may *not* trade in the open-outcry market except as part of the auction trade that re-enables AEMI. Any verbal involvement by crowd members would take place during the post-trade allocation process as follows. The Specialist would set the price of the pair-off, with the contra interest that is applied against the imbalance coming from marketable orders on the contra side of the AEMI Book (and with intermarket sweep orders being generated to away markets as necessary). 10 Once the Specialist has set the auction price, he does not exercise any additional discretion that would influence the number of shares of the imbalance that he is allocated vis-à-vis the other members of the crowd. He must announce the price of the trade to the crowd before it is printed to the tape, so crowd members will know whether they are entitled to be part of the trade. Any remainder of the imbalance will be parity-allocated against the Specialist and/or eligible crowd participants represented electronically on the contra side of the AEMI Book. Each active crowd participant with a bid, offer, or order on the contra side of the aggressing order will receive a message from AEMI with the initial allocation that AEMI has automatically calculated for that crowd member. Following this initial post-trade allocation, those crowd participants who receive an initial allocation will verbally confirm their participation or non-participation to the Specialist. 11 The Specialist enters the necessary adjustments into AEMI, and AEMI will compute the revised individual allocations for each crowd member. AEMI will then immediately send a message to each of these crowd participants with their respective individual final trade allocations, with Floor Brokers completing an additional allocation of their individual trades to existing orders in their HHTs. 10 The Specialist may not be part of the pair-off at that price; he participates only in the absorption of the imbalance. 11 If the Specialist were to ignore a particular crowd member's confirmation of participation (arguably so that the Specialist could execute more of the imbalance himself), this would be very obvious to the disadvantaged crowd member (because his allocation would go to zero from the number that he initially was assigned by AEMI), who could challenge the result. The Amex believes, in other words, that it is highly unlikely that the Specialist could get away with such a blatant act. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Regulation NMS, as well as Section 6(b) of the Act, 12 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 13 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, 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. 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Amex believes that 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 either solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change constitutes a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule, it has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act 14 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder. 15 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. 14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 15 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-Amex-2007-105 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-2007-105. 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 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-2007-105 and should be submitted on or before October 19, 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. E7-19163 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56494; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-110] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Obvious Error Rules September 21, 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 September 13, 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 Exchange. CBOE has designated this proposal as one concerned solely with the administration of the Exchange under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(3) 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)(iii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend CBOE Rules 6.25 and 24.16, which are the Exchange's rules applicable to the nullification and adjustment of transactions. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, 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, 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. CBOE has substantially 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 Under CBOE's obvious error rules, Trading Officials render certain determinations regarding the nullification and adjustment of transactions. The term “Trading Officials” is currently defined to mean two Exchange members designated as Floor Officials and one member of the Exchange's trading floor liaison (“TFL”) staff. The Exchange states that the purpose of the proposed rule change is to replace the reference to the “TFL staff” with a reference to the “Exchange's staff designated to perform Trading Official functions.” The Exchange is proposing to make the change at this time because it recently determined to reassign the Trading Official function from the CBOE TFL group to a group of designated Exchange personnel within CBOE's market control center. In trying to accommodate the reassignment, the Exchange believes a better approach than making a specific reference to a particular Exchange staff group is to make reference to the “Exchange's staff designated to perform Trading Official functions.” In this way, the Exchange would have the flexibility to delegate the Trading Official authorities under the obvious error rules to the appropriate Exchange staff and would not have to make a rule change merely, for instance, to accommodate a future change in the title of a staff group or to accommodate the reassignment of the authority to another staff group. The Exchange believes that because the authority exercised by Exchange staff is delegated pursuant to Exchange rules, the title of the particular group exercising their authority should not be relevant. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 5 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 6 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, foster cooperation among persons engaged in facilitating securities transactions, and protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes that this proposal complies with the Act because the Exchange is amending its rules to update and/or generalize references to certain Exchange staff in order to facilitate compliance. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 6 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 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 has been designated as concerned solely with the administration of the Exchange pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 7 and Rule 19b-4(f)(3) 8 thereunder. Accordingly, the proposal will take effect upon filing with the Commission. At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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. 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 8 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(3). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml);* or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-CBOE-2007-110 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-2007-110. 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-CBOE-2007-110 and should be submitted on or before October 19, 2007. 9 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 9 Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19162 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56493; File No. SR-ISE-2007-83] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Eliminate Position and Exercise Limits for Options on the Russell 2000 Index, and to Specify that Certain Reduced-Value Options on Broad-Based Security Indexes Have No Position and Exercise Limits September 21, 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 September 7, 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. On September 17, 2007, ISE submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 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, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to eliminate position and exercise limits for options on the Russell 2000 Index (“RUT”), and to specify that reduced-value options on broad-based security indexes for which full-value options have no position and exercise limits will similarly have no position and exercise limits. 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. ISE 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 ISE Rule 2004 to eliminate position and exercise limits for options on RUT, a broad-based securities index that is multiply listed and heavily traded. 5 The Exchange further proposes to amend ISE Rule 2004 to specify that reduced-value options on broad-based security indexes for which full-value options have no position and exercise limits will similarly have no position and exercise limits. Currently, options on the Full Size Nasdaq 100 Index Options (“NDX”) have no position and exercise limits. In this regard, the Exchange proposes to eliminate position and exercise limits for options on the Mini Nasdaq 100 Index (“MNX”). 5 The current position and exercise limits, under ISE Rules 2004 and 2007, respectively, for RUT options are 50,000 contracts, with no more than 30,000 of such contracts in a series in the nearest expiration month. Eliminate Position and Exercise Limits for RUT Options The Exchange believes that the circumstances and considerations relied upon in approving the elimination of position and exercise limits for other heavily traded broad-based index options ( *e.g.* , options on NDX) equally apply to the current proposal relating to position and exercise limits for RUT options. 6 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52894 (December 5, 2005), 70 FR 73497 (December 12, 2005) (SR-ISE-2005-45) (“NDX Approval Order”). In approving the elimination of position and exercise limits for NDX options, the Commission considered the capitalization of this index and the deep and liquid markets for the securities underlying the index significantly reduced concerns of market manipulation or disruption in the underlying markets. The Commission also noted the active trading volume for options on the index. ISE believes that RUT shares these factors in common with NDX. As of July 31, 2007, the approximate market capitalization of NDX was $2.28 trillion, the average daily trading volume (“ADTV”) for the components of NDX was 572 million, and the ADTV for options on NDX was 64,003 contracts per day. ISE believes that RUT has very comparable characteristics. The market capitalization for RUT is $1.73 trillion dollars, the ADTV for the underlying securities is 535 million shares, and the ADTV for the option is 79,000 contracts. In approving the elimination of position and exercise limits for NDX, the Commission also noted the financial requirements imposed by both the Exchange and the Commission serve to address any concerns that an Exchange member or its customer(s) may try to maintain an inordinately large unhedged position in options on NDX. These financial requirements also apply to RUT options. Under ISE rules, the Exchange also has the authority to impose additional margin upon accounts maintaining underhedged positions, and is further able to monitor accounts to determine when such action is warranted. As noted in the Exchange's rules, the clearing firm carrying such an account would be subject to capital charges under Rule 15c3-1 under the Act 7 to the extent of any resulting margin deficiency. 8 7 17 CFR 240.15c3-1. 8 *See* ISE Rule 2006(a)(14). In approving the elimination of position and exercise limits for NDX, the Commission relied heavily on the Exchange's ability to provide surveillance and reporting safeguards to detect and deter trading abuses arising from the elimination of position and exercise limits in options on the index. The Exchange represents that it monitors the trading in RUT options in the same manner as trading in NDX options and that the current ISE surveillance procedures are adequate to continue monitoring RUT options. In addition, the Exchange intends to impose a reporting requirement on ISE members who trade RUT options. This reporting requirement, which is currently imposed on members who trade NDX options, will require members who maintain in excess of 100,000 RUT option contracts on the same side of the market, for their own accounts or for the account of customers, to report information as to whether the positions are hedged and provide documentation as to how such contracts are hedged, in a manner and form required by the Exchange. The Exchange may also specify other reporting requirements, as well as the limit at which the reporting requirement may be triggered. The Exchange believes that eliminating position and exercise limits for RUT options is consistent with ISE rules relating to similar broad-based indexes and also allows ISE members and their customers greater hedging and investment opportunities. Elimination of Position Limits for Reduced-Value Options on Broad-Based-Indexes for Which There Are Not Position and Exercise Limits for Full-Value Options The Exchange lists and trades reduced-value options on broad-based indexes for which the Exchange also lists and trades full value options ( *e.g.* , MNX options). When the Exchange received approval to list and trade MNX options, the proscribed position and exercise limits were equivalent to the reduced-value contract factor ( *e.g.* , 10) multiplied by the applicable position and exercise limits for the full-value options on the same broad-based index. 9 For example, when the Exchange received approval to list and trade NDX and MNX options, 10 the position and exercise limits for MNX ( 1/10 th NDX value) options were 750,000 contracts, which was equal to the applicable factor

(10)multiplied by the position limit for NDX options (75,000 contracts). In the NDX/MNX Approval Order, the Exchange noted that NDX contracts would be aggregated with MNX contracts to determine compliance with applicable position and exercise limits. Since position and exercise limits were eliminated for NDX options, 11 the Exchange now proposes to eliminate position and exercise limits for MNX options. The Exchange further proposes to amend Rule 2004 to state that reduced-value options on broad-based security indexes for which full-value options have no position and exercise limits would similarly have no position and exercise limits. 9 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51121 (February 1, 2005), 70 FR 6476 (February 7, 2005) (SR-ISE-2005-01) (“NDX/MNX Approval Order”). 10 *Id.* 11 *See* NDX Approval Order, *supra* note 6. In addition, because position and exercise limits for reduced-value options are aggregated with full-value options for purposes of determining compliance with position and exercise limits, the Exchange proposes amending Rule 2006(a)(13) to reflect that such aggregation would apply when calculating reporting requirements ( *e.g.* , 10 MNX options equal 1 NDX full-value contract). Further, the Exchange proposes to delete certain rule text in Rule 2006(a)(5) relating to MNX options because, pursuant to this proposed rule change, there is no longer a need for an exemption from position limits for MNX options. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act, 12 in general, and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 13 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 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. Further, the Exchange notes that this proposed rule change is similar to proposals filed by the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex”) and the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE”) that were recently approved by the Commission. 14 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 14 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 56351 (September 4, 2007), 72 FR 51875 (September 11, 2007) (SR-Amex-2007-81); and 56350 (September 4, 2007), 72 FR 51878 (September 11, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-79). 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 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 foregoing rule change does not:

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

(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(3)become operative for 30 days after the date 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 15 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 16 15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 16 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. 17 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 18 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 the public interest because such waiver will allow ISE members and their customers greater hedging and investment opportunities in RUT options without further delay. The Commission notes that it recently approved substantially similar proposals filed by CBOE and Amex. 19 The Commission believes that ISE's proposal to eliminate position and exercise limits for RUT options raises no new issues. For these reasons, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing with the Commission. 20 17 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. The Exchange has requested the Commission to waive this five-day pre-filing notice requirement. The Commission hereby grants this request. 18 *Id* . 19 *See supra* note 14. 20 For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 21 21 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposal, the Commission considers the period to commence on September 17, 2007, the date on which the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-ISE-2007-83 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-2007-83. 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 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-2007-83 and should be submitted on or before October 19, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 22 Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. 22 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). [FR Doc. E7-19161 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56496; File No. SR-ISE-2007-85] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to PrecISE Fees September 21, 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 September 17, 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, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by ISE. ISE filed the proposal pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 4 thereunder, as establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charges applicable to a member, which renders the proposed rule change 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)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change ISE is proposing to amend its Schedule of Fees to establish fees to:

(i)Raise its PrecISE through VPN fees; and

(ii)adopt a PrecISE Sponsored Customer fee. The text of the proposed rule change is available at ISE, *http://www.iseoptions.com* , and the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of this proposed rule change is to amend the Exchange's Schedule of Fees to:

(i)Raise its PrecISE through VPN fees; and

(ii)adopt a PrecISE Sponsored Customer fee. “PrecISE” is ISE's internally-developed proprietary order-routing terminal used by Electronic Access Members (“EAMs”) to send order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange currently permits EAMs to access the Exchange through a VPN connection from their PrecISE terminals for which the Exchange currently charges $250 per month per terminal. 5 VPN is an internet-based “virtual private network” that allows secure access to the ISE through the internet. PrecISE through VPN provides PrecISE functionality without requiring dedicated network lines and is a cost-efficient means of access for small and mid-sized broker-dealers. The Exchange notes that EAMs may also use PrecISE through VPN as a back-up or disaster recovery connection to the Exchange. The Exchange now proposes to increase its PrecISE through VPN fee from $250 per month per terminal to $300 per month per terminal to offset the Exchange's costs for maintaining these connections. 6 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54121 (July 10, 2006), 71 FR 40566 (July 17, 2006) (SR-ISE-2006-31). 6 The Exchange notes that this proposed fee increase will bring the PrecISE through VPN fees in line with the fee the Exchange currently charges EAMs for a network connection. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55960 (June 26, 2007), 72 FR 36531 (July 3, 2007) (SR-ISE-2007-42) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness of proposed rule change adopting a per user per month fee for the Exchange's PrecISE Trade® terminal). The Exchange also proposes to adopt a PrecISE Sponsored Customer fee of $300 per month per terminal. The Exchange currently operates a program that permits sponsored customers of Members to access the Exchange directly via a PrecISE trade terminal, provided certain conditions are met. 7 The proposed Sponsored Customer fee shall only apply to sponsored customers that are not affiliates of the ISE member who sponsors its access. For example, an ISE member that sponsors five of its customers, all of whom are not affiliated with it, will be charged $1,500 per month for the five sponsored terminals through which the Member's customers will be able to directly connect to the Exchange. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55586 (April 5, 2007), 72 FR 18701 (April 13, 2007) (SR-ISE-2007-19) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness of proposed rule change relating to access to the Exchange by Sponsored Customers). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the objectives of section 6 of the Act, 8 in general, and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(4), 9 in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. In particular, these fees will permit the Exchange to recover the costs of developing, maintaining, and supporting PrecISE Trade terminals and its various functionalities. Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed fees are equitable in that they only apply to those members that elect to use PrecISE. 10 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 10 Telephone amendment between Samir Patel, Assistant General Counsel, ISE, and Richard Holley, Senior Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, September 21, 2007. B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange believes that 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 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 interested parties. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective upon filing with the Commission pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 11 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 12 thereunder, because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge applicable only to a member. 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 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. 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-2007-85 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-2007-85. 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 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-2007-85 and should be submitted on or before October 19, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 13 13 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19164 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56497; File No. SR-ISE-2007-86] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Commence a One Year Pilot Program Relating to a Quote Mitigation Plan for Competitive Market Makers September 21, 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 September 17, 2007, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (the “Exchange” or the “ISE”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange has designated this proposal as constituting a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act, 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The ISE submits this rule filing to implement a quote mitigation plan for the Exchange's Competitive Market Makers (“CMM”) on a pilot basis for one-year. 5 The text of the proposed rule change is available at the ISE, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.ise.com* . 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56444 (September 14, 2007) (Order approving SR-ISE-2007-45). 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 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 ISE 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 rule change is to implement a quote mitigation plan for the Exchange's CMMs. As noted above, the Commission recently approved, 6 on a one-year pilot basis, this quote mitigation plan applicable to up to twenty

(20)securities that are in the Penny Pilot. Under this proposal, a CMM will be required to enter continuous quotations in just 60 percent of the series, rather than in all series, of the options classes to which it is appointed. Once a CMM enters a quote in a series, it must continue to quote in that series until the close of trading that day. 6 *Id* . Further, ISE Rule 804(e)(2)(iii), which states that a CMM may be called upon to submit quotes in one or more series of options to which it is appointed in the interest of maintaining fair and orderly markets, shall continue to apply during the pilot period. The Exchange proposes to commence this pilot program on September 20, 2007 for a period of one year. Prior to the commencement of the pilot program, the Exchange will issue a circular to CMMs identifying the initial list of securities selected for the pilot program. 2. Statutory Basis The statutory basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is the requirement under Section 6(b)(5) 7 that an exchange have rules that 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 for a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The 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 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 The proposed rule change has become effective Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder, 9 because the proposal constitutes a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule. At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 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 No. SR-ISE-2007-86 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-2007-86. 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 Commissions 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 St., NE., Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 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-2007-86 and should be submitted by October 19, 2007. 10 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 10 Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19165 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Public Notice for a Change in Use of Aeronautical Property at Manchester Airport, Manchester, NH AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Request for public comments. SUMMARY: The FAA is requesting public comment on the City of Manchester, New Hampshire's request to change a portion (.42 acres) of Airport property from aeronautical use to non-aeronautical use. The property is located on South Willow Street, Manchester, New Hampshire and is a portion of map 854, Lot 5 and Map 854, Lot 1B. Upon disposition the property will be used for the realignment of South Willow Street for Runway Safety Area Improvements at Manchester Airport, Manchester, New Hampshire. The property was acquired under AIP Project Nos. 3-33-0011-31 and 3-33-0011-67. The disposition of proceeds from the disposal of airport property will be in accordance with FAA's Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue, published in the **Federal Register** on February 16, 1999. DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 29, 2007. ADDRESSES: Documents are available for review by appointment by contacting Mr. Richard Fixler, Assistant Airport Director, Engineering & Planning at Manchester Airport. Telephone

(603)628-6211, Ext. 519 or by contacting Donna R. Witte, Federal Aviation Administration, 16 New England Executive Park, Burlington, Massachusetts, Telephone 781-238-7624. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna R. Witte at the Federal Aviation Administration, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803, Telephone 781-238-7624. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 124 of The Wendell H. Ford Aviation investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR 21) requires the FAA to provide an opportunity for public notice and comment to the “waiver” or “modification” of a sponsor's Federal obligation to use certain airport property for aeronautical purposes. Dated: Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts on September 17, 2007. LaVerne F. Reid, Manager, Airports Division, New England Region. [FR Doc. 07-4799 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 25

Traces to 25 documents

U.S. Code