Notices. Notice of a new Privacy Act System of Records NSF-72: Research
24,124 words·~110 min read·
/register/2007/10/17/07-5103A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY: Office of the General Counsel, National Science Foundation. ACTION: Notice of a new Privacy Act System of Records NSF-72: Research.gov. *System Name:* Research.gov. SUMMARY: Research.gov is a partnership, led by the National Science Foundation (NSF), of Federal, research-oriented grant making agencies with a shared vision of enhancing customer service for grant applicants while streamlining and standardizing processes among partner agencies.
Research.gov displays records on research and other proposals jointly submitted by individual applicants (Principal Investigators) and their home academic or other institutions to the NSF as well as the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA)Cooperative State Research Education and Extension Service (CSREES). NSF and USDA/CSREES make awards to these institutions under which the individual applicants serve as principal investigators. Research.gov provides end users with a consolidated view of grant application data by displaying information from existing Privacy Act systems maintained by its partner agencies (NSF and USDA/CSREES). Reprints of these Privacy Act Systems are included at the end of this notice (NSF-12, NSF-50, NSF-51 and USDA-CSREES-4). The records displayed by Research.gov are used by the applicant/grantee's home academic or other institution, Sponsored Project Offices and Principal Investigators to track the status of grant applications. DATES: *Effective Date:* This action shall be effective without further notice on November 17, 2007 unless comments are received during or before this period that would result in a contrary determination. *Comments Due Date:* Submit comments on or before November 17, 2007. ADDRESSES: Address all comments concerning this notice to Leslie Jensen, National Science Foundation, Office of the General Counsel, Room 1265, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230 or by sending electronic mail (e-mail) to *ljensen@nsf.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This publication is in accordance with the Privacy Act requirement that agencies publish a new system of records in the **Federal Register** . Submit comments as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Identify all comments sent in electronic e-mail with Subject Line: Comments on new system. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leslie Jensen
(703)292-5065. Dated: October 12, 2007. Lawrence Rudolph, General Counsel. National Science Foundation SYSTEM NAME: Research.gov (NSF-72). SYSTEM LOCATION: Research.gov is hosted by contract in Ashburn, VA. The hosting facility provides only the computer hardware, network environment, and application infrastructure for the Research.gov Portal. The data resulting from grant applications to the NSF are maintained both centrally and by individual NSF offices and programs at the National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. Files resulting from submission to USDA/CSREES are maintained both centrally and by individual USDA/CSREES offices and programs at the Cooperative State Research Education and Extension Service, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250. CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM: Those who have submitted grant applications to: * The NSF using FastLane since October 1999, * The NSF using Grants.gov since June 2005, * USDA/CSREES through Grants.gov since October 2006. CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: Research.gov displays information about grant applications submitted to NSF and/or USDA/CSREES as well as data necessary for applicants to these agencies to manage user access accounts and organizational records at Research.gov. AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: 44 U.S.C. 3101; 42 U.S.C. 1870; National Agricultural Research Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (NARETPA), 7 U.S.C. 3318. PURPOSE OF THE SYSTEM: Research.gov enables applicants to NSF and/or CSREES to view the status of grant application submissions to the respective agency. ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: 1. Disclosure may be made to a Congressional office from the record of an individual in response to an inquiry from the Congressional office made at the request of that individual. 2. Information from the system may be disclosed to contractors, grantees, volunteers, experts, advisors, and other individuals who perform a service to or work on or under a contract, grant, cooperative agreement, advisory committee, committee of visitors, or other arrangement with or for the Federal government, as necessary to carry out their duties in pursuit of the purposes described above. The contractors are subject to the provisions of the Privacy Act. 3. Information from the system may be merged with other computer files in order to carry out statistical studies or otherwise assist NSF with program management, evaluation, and reporting. Disclosure may be made for this purpose to NSF contractors and collaborating researchers, other Government agencies, and qualified research institutions and their staffs. Disclosures are made only after scrutiny of research protocols and with appropriate controls. The results of such studies are statistical in nature and do not identify individuals. 4. Information from the system may be disclosed to the Department of Justice or the Office of Management and Budget for the purpose of obtaining advice on the application of the Freedom of Information Act or Privacy Act to the records. 5. Information from the system may be given to another Federal agency, a court, or a party in litigation before a court or in an administrative proceeding being conducted by a Federal agency when the Government is a party to the judicial or administrative proceeding. 6. Information from the system may be given to the Department of Justice, to the extent disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the record was collected and is relevant and necessary to litigation or anticipated litigation, in which one of the following is a party or has an interest:
(a)NSF or any of its components;
(b)an NSF employee in his/her official capacity;
(c)an NSF employee in his/her individual capacity when the Department of Justice is representing or considering representing the employee; or
(d)the United States, when NSF determines that litigation is likely to affect the Agency. 7. Records from this system may be disclosed to representatives of the General Services Administration and the National Archives and Records Administration who are conducting records management inspections under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906. 8. To appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when
(1)the NSF suspects or has confirmed that the security or confidentiality of information in the system of records has been compromised;
(2)the NSF has determined that as a result of the suspected or confirmed compromise there is a risk of harm to economic or property interests, identity theft or fraud, or harm to the security or integrity of this system or other systems or programs (whether maintained by the NSF or another agency or entity) that rely upon the compromised information; and
(3)the disclosure made to such agencies, entities, and persons is reasonably necessary to assist in connection with the NSF's efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed compromise and prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm. POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: STORAGE: The information displayed by Research.gov is stored in separate systems maintained by participating agencies (i.e., NSF's FastLane and USDA/CSREES' C-REEEMS). Each agency maintains these systems separately, and maintains the original records electronically and/or in paper files. RETRIEVABILITY: Information can be retrieved electronically using an applicant's name or identifying number. An individual's name may be used to manually access material in alphabetized paper files. SAFEGUARDS: Buildings are locked during non-business hours. Records are kept in rooms that are locked during non-business hours. Records maintained in electronic form are password protected. System Manager(s) and Address: For NSF, the Division Director of particular office or program maintaining such records, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. For CSREES, the Director of the office or program maintaining such records, United States Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Research Education and Extension Service, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250. Notification Procedure: The NSF Privacy Act Officer should be contacted in accordance with procedures set forth at 45 CFR part 613. Record Access Procedures: See “Notification Procedure” above. Contesting Record Procedures: See “Notification Procedure” above. Record Source Categories: Information is obtained from the principal investigator, academic institution or other applicant, peer reviewers, and others. Systems Exempted from Certain Provisions of the Act: The portions of this system consisting of investigatory material that would identify reviewers or other persons supplying evaluations of NSF applicants and their proposals have been exempted at 45 CFR part 613 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5). Attachments NSF-12 System Name: Fellowships and Other Awards. System Location: Numerous files are maintained in paper, microfiche, or electronic form by individual offices and programs at the National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Others are maintained by NSF contractors, currently Oak Ridge Associated Universities, PO Box 3010, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-2010. Categories of Individuals Covered by the System: Persons applying or nominated for and/or receiving NSF support, either individually or through an academic institution, including fellowships or awards of various types. Categories of Records in the System: Information varies depending on type of fellowship or award. Normally the information includes personal information supplied with the application or nomination; reference reports; transcripts and Graduate Record Examination scores to the extent required during the application process; abstracts; evaluations and recommendations, review records and selection process results; administrative data and correspondence accumulating during fellows' tenure; and other related materials. There is a cumulative index of all persons applying for or receiving NSF Graduate and NATO fellowships. Authority for Maintenance of the System: 44 U.S.C. 3101; 42 U.S.C. 1869, 1870, 1880, 1881a and 20 U.S.C. 3915. Purpose of the System: This system enables program offices to maintain appropriate files and investigatory material in evaluating applications or nominations for fellowships or other awards. NSF employees may access the system to make decisions regarding which proposals to fund or awards to make, and to carry out other authorized internal duties. Routine Uses of Records Maintained in the System, Including Categories of Users and the Purposes of Such Uses: 1. Information from the system may be merged with other computer files in order to carry out statistical studies. Disclosure may be made for this purpose to NSF contractors and collaborating researchers, other Government agencies, and qualified research institutions and their staffs. The contractors are subject to the provisions of the Privacy Act. The results of such studies are statistical in nature and do not identify individuals. 2. Disclosure of information from the system may be made to qualified reviewers for their opinion and evaluation of applicants or nominees as part of the application review process; and to other Government agencies needing data regarding applicants or nominees as part of the application review process, or in order to coordinate programs. 3. Information (such as name, Social Security Number, field of study, and other information directly relating to the fellowship, review status including the agency's decision, year of first award, tenure pattern, start time, whether receiving international travel allowance or a mentoring assistantship) is given to the applicant, nominating, or grantee institution, or an institution the applicant, nominee, or fellow or awardee is attending or planning to attend or employed by for purposes of facilitating review or award decisions or administering fellowships or awards. Notice of the agency's decision may be given to nominators. 4. In the case of fellows or awardees receiving stipends directly from the Government, information is transmitted to the Department of Treasury for preparation of checks or electronic fund transfer authorizations. 5. Fellows' or awardees' name, home institution, and field of study may be released for public information/affairs purposes including press releases. 6. Disclosure may be made to a congressional office from the record of an individual in response to an inquiry from the congressional office made at the request of that individual. 7. Information from the system may be given to contractors, grantees, volunteers, experts, advisors, and other individuals who perform a service to or work on or under a contract, grant, cooperative agreement, advisory committee, committee of visitors, or other arrangement with or for the Federal government, as necessary to carry out their duties. The contractors are subject to the provisions of the Privacy Act. 8. Information from the system may be given to the Department of Justice or the Office of Management and Budget for the purpose of obtaining advice on the application of the Freedom of Information Act or Privacy Act to the records. 9. Information from the system may be given to another Federal agency, a court, or a party in litigation before a court or in an administrative proceeding being conducted by a Federal agency when the Government is a party to the judicial or administrative proceeding. 10. Information from the system may be given to the Department of Justice, to the extent disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the record was collected and is relevant and necessary to litigation or anticipated litigation, in which one of the following is a party or has an interest:
(a)NSF or any of its components;
(b)an NSF employee in his/her official capacity;
(c)an NSF employee in his/ her individual capacity when the Department of Justice is representing or considering representing the employee; or
(d)the United States, when NSF determines that litigation is likely to affect the Agency. 11. Records from this system may be disclosed to representatives of the General Services Administration and the National Archives and Records Administration who are conducting records management inspections under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906. Policies and Practices for Storing, Retrieving, Accessing, Retaining, and Disposing of Records in the System: Storage: Paper records are kept in file folders. Some records are maintained electronically or on microfiche, including records kept by NSF contractors. Original application materials are kept at NSF. Retrievability: Alphabetically by applicant or nominee name. Safeguards: Building is locked during non-business hours. Records at NSF are kept in rooms that are locked during non-business hours. Records maintained by NSF contractors are kept in similar rooms and some records are locked in cabinets. Records maintained in electronic form are password protected. Retention and Disposal: Files are maintained in accordance with approved record retention schedules. For example, fellowship application files for awardees are kept for 10 years after completion of fellowship or award, then destroyed, while unsuccessful fellowship application files are destroyed after three years; files of recipients of the Waterman Award and National Medal of Science are permanent and eventually retired to the National Archives; those of non-recipients are destroyed after five years. System Manager(s) and Address: Division Director of particular office or program maintaining such records, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Notification Procedure: Contact the NSF Privacy Act Officer in accordance with procedures found at 45 CFR part 613. You can expedite your request if you identify the fellowship or award program about which you are interested. For example, indicate whether you applied for or received a “Graduate Fellowship” or a “Faculty Fellowship in Science” as opposed to merely saying you want a copy of your fellowship. Record Access Procedure: See “Notification” above. Contesting Record Procedure: See “Notification” above. Record Source Categories: Information supplied by or for individuals applying for, nominated for, or receiving support; references; the Education Testing Service; educational institutions supplying transcripts; review records and administrative data developed during selection process and award tenure. Systems Exempted from Certain Provisions of the Act: The portions of this system consisting of investigatory material that would identify references, reviewers, or other persons supplying evaluations of applicants or nominees for fellowships or other awards (and where applicable, their proposals) have been exempted at 5 CFR 613 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5). NSF-50 System Name: Principal Investigator/Proposal file and Associated Records. System Location: Files are maintained both centrally and by individual NSF offices and programs at the National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. Categories of Individuals Covered by the System: Persons who request or have previously requested and/or received support from the National Science Foundation, either individually or through an academic or other institution. Categories of Records in the System: The names of principal investigators and other identifying information, addresses of principal investigators, demographic data, the proposal and its identifying number, supporting data from the academic institution or other applicant, proposal evaluations from peer reviewers, a review record, financial data, and other related material. Other related material may include, for example, committee or panel discussion summaries as applicable. AUthority for Maintenance of the System: 44 U.S.C. 3101; 42 U.S.C. 1870. Purpose of the System: This system enables program offices to maintain appropriate files and investigatory material in evaluating applications for grants or other support. NSF employees may access the system to make decisions regarding which proposals to fund, and to carry out other authorized internal duties. Information on principal investigators is also entered in System 51, “Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records,” a subsystem of this system, to be used as a source of potential candidates to serve as reviewers as part of the merit review process, or for inclusion on a panel or advisory committee. Routine Uses of Records Maintained in the System, Including Categories of Users and the Purposes of Such Uses: 1. Disclosure of information from the system may be made to qualified reviewers for their opinion and evaluation of applicants and their proposals as part of the NSF application review process; and to other Government agencies or other entities needing information regarding applicants or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy. 2. Information from the system may be provided to the applicant or Grantee institution to provide or obtain data regarding the application review process or award decisions, or administering grant awards. 3. Disclosure may be made to a Congressional office from the record of an individual in response to an inquiry from the Congressional office made at the request of that individual. 4. Information from the system may be disclosed to contractors, grantees, volunteers, experts, advisors, and other individuals who perform a service to or work on or under a contract, grant, cooperative agreement, advisory committee, committee of visitors, or other arrangement with or for the Federal government, as necessary to carry out their duties in pursuit of the purposes described above. The contractors are subject to the provisions of the Privacy Act. 5. Information from the system may be merged with other computer files in order to carry out statistical studies or otherwise assist NSF with program management, evaluation, and reporting. Disclosure may be made for this purpose to NSF contractors and collaborating researchers, other Government agencies, and qualified research institutions and their staffs. Disclosures are made only after scrutiny of research protocols and with appropriate controls. The results of such studies are statistical in nature and do not identify individuals. 6. Information from the system may be disclosed to the Department of Justice or the Office of Management and Budget for the purpose of obtaining advice on the application of the Freedom of Information Act or Privacy Act to the records. 7. Information from the system may be given to another Federal agency, a court, or a party in litigation before a court or in an administrative proceeding being conducted by a Federal agency when the Government is a party to the judicial or administrative proceeding. 8. Information from the system may be given to the Department of Justice, to the extent disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the record was collected and is relevant and necessary to litigation or anticipated litigation, in which one of the following is a party or has an interest:
(a)NSF or any of its components;
(b)an NSF employee in his/her official capacity;
(c)an NSF employee in his/her individual capacity when the Department of Justice is representing or considering representing the employee; or
(d)the United States, when NSF determines that litigation is likely to affect the Agency. 9. Records from this system may be disclosed to representatives of the General Services Administration and the National Archives and Records Administration who are conducting records management inspections under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906. Policies and Practices for Storing, Retrieving, Accessing, Retaining, and Disposing of Records in the System: Storage: Various portions of the system are maintained electronically and/or in paper files. Retrievability: Information can be retrieved electronically using an applicant's name or identifying number. An individual's name may be used to manually access material in alphabetized paper files. Safeguards: Building is locked during non-business hours. Records are kept in rooms that are locked during non-business hours. Records maintained in electronic form are password protected. Retention and Disposal: Files are maintained in accordance with approved record retention schedules. Awarded proposals are transferred to the Federal Records Center for permanent retention. Declined proposals are destroyed five years after they are closed out. System Manager(s) and Address: Division Director of particular office or program maintaining such records, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. Notification Procedure: The NSF Privacy Act Officer should be contacted in accordance with procedures set forth at 45 CFR part 613. Record Access Procedures: See “Notification Procedure” above. Contesting Record Procedures: See “Notification Procedure” above. Record Source Categories: Information is obtained from the principal investigator, academic institution or other applicant, peer reviewers, and others. Systems Exempted From Certain Provisions of the Act: The portions of this system consisting of investigatory material that would identify reviewers or other persons supplying evaluations of NSF applicants and their proposals have been exempted at 45 CFR part 613 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5). NSF-51 System Name: Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records. System Location: Files are maintained centrally, and in some cases by individual NSF offices and programs, at the National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. Categories of Individuals Covered by the System: Reviewers who evaluate Foundation applicants and their proposals, either by submitting individual comments, or serving on review panels or site visit teams, or both. Categories of Records in the System: The “Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records” system is a subsystem of the “Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records” system (NSF-50), and contains the reviewer's name, title of proposal(s) reviewed and identifying number, and other related material. Authority for Maintenance of the System: 44 U.S.C. 3101; 42 U.S.C. 1870. Purpose of the System: This system enables program offices to reference specific reviewers and maintain appropriate files for use in evaluating applications for grants or other support. NSF employees may access the system to help select reviewers as part of the merit review process, and to carry out other authorized internal duties. Routine uses of records maintained in the system, including categories of users and the purposes of such uses: Disclosure of information in this system may be made to: 1. Federal government agencies needing names of potential reviewers and specialists in particular fields. 2. Contractors, grantees, volunteers, experts, advisors, and other individuals who perform a service to or work on or under a contract, grant, cooperative agreement, advisory committee, committee of visitors, or other arrangement with or for the Federal government, as necessary to carry out their duties. The contractors are subject to the provisions of Privacy Act. 3. The Department of Justice or the Office of Management and Budget for the purpose of obtaining advice on the application of the Freedom of Information Act or Privacy Act to the records. 4. Another Federal agency, a court, or a party in litigation before a court or in an administrative proceeding being conducted by a Federal agency when the Government is a party to the judicial or administrative proceeding. 5. The Department of Justice, to the extent disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the record was collected and is relevant and necessary to litigation or anticipated litigation, in which one of the following is a party or has an interest:
(a)NSF or any of its components;
(b)an NSF employee in his/her capacity;
(c)an NSF employee in his/her individual capacity when the Department of Justice is representing or considering representing the employee; or
(d)the United States, when NSF determines that litigation is likely to affect the Agency. 6. Representatives of the General Services Administration and the National Archives and Records Administration who are conducting records management inspections under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906. Policies and Practices for Storing, Retrieving, Accessing, Retaining, and Disposing of Records in the System: Storage: Various portions of the system are maintained electronically and/or in paper files. Retrievability: Information can be accessed from the electronic database by addressing data contained in the database, including individual reviewer names. An individual's name may be used to manually access material in alphabetized paper files. Safeguards: Building is locked during non-business hours. Records are kept in rooms that are locked during non-business hours. Records maintained in electronic form are password protected. Retention and disposal: File is cumulative and is maintained indefinitely. System Manager(s) and Address: Division Director of particular office or program maintaining such records, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. Notification Procedure: The NSF Privacy Act Officer should be contacted in accordance with procedures set forth at 45 CFR part 613. Record Access Procedures: See “Notification Procedure” above. Contesting Record Procedures: See “Notification Procedure” above. Record Source Categories: Information is obtained from the individual reviewers, suggestions from other reviewers, the “Principal Investigator/Proposal File” (NSF-50), other applicants for NSF funding or other members of the research community, and from NSF program officers. Systems Exempted from Certain Provisions of the Act: The portions of this system consisting of investigatory material which would identify reviewers or other persons supplying evaluations of NSF applicants and their proposals have been exempted at 5 CFR part 613 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5). Privacy Act System “CSREES Grants System,” USDA/CSREES-4 Report The purpose of this new system of records is to enable program offices to reference reviewers and maintain appropriate files and supporting material in processing, evaluating, and managing applications for grants or other support, including completing awards and distributing funds. CSREES employees may access the system to make decisions regarding proposals and to perform any other authorized internal duties. The authority for maintaining this system of records is the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977; 7 U.S.C. 3318. Use of this system, as established, should not result in infringement of any individual's right to privacy. While the information in this system will be made available to Federal, State, and local agencies, individuals assisting CSREES staff, Department of Justice, and Members of Congress as necessary, all individuals about whom information in this system is maintained will voluntarily submit the information for the purpose of submitting proposals to CSREES and for evaluating applicants and their proposals. The records are maintained on system file servers and paper files. All records containing personal information are maintained in secured file cabinets or are accessed by unique passwords and log-on procedures. The system provides for seven types of routine use releases, as follows: Routine use 1 permits disclosure to Federal agencies needing names of potential reviewers or specialists in particular fields. Routine use 2 permits disclosure to individuals assisting CSREES staff, either through grant or contract, in the performance of their duties. Routine use 3 permits disclosure to Federal agencies as part of the Presidential Management Initiative, E-Grants. Routine use 4 permits disclosure to the Department of Justice when the agency or any component thereof, or any employee of the agency in his or her official capacity where the Department of Justice has agreed to represent the employee, or the United States Government is a party to a litigation or has an interest in such litigation and it is determined that the records are both relevant and necessary to the litigation. Routine use 5 permits disclosure to an appropriate agency, whether Federal, State, or local, charged with the responsibility of investigating or prosecuting a violation of law or rule, regulation, or order issued when information available indicates a violation or potential violation of law. Routine use 6 permits disclosure in response to a request for discovery or appearance of a witness, to the extent that what is disclosed is relevant to the subject matter involved in a pending judicial or criminal proceeding or in response to a subpoena issued in a proceeding before a court or adjudicative body, to the extent that the records requested are relevant to the proceedings. Routine use 7 permits disclosure to a Member of Congress or to a Congressional staff member in response to an inquiry of the Congressional office made at the written request of the constituent about whom the record is maintained. This new system of records will not be exempt from any provisions of the Privacy Act. SYSTEM LOCATION: Records are maintained in Program, Grants, and Funds Management offices and in a computerized system at the Cooperative State, Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES), Waterfront Centre, 800 9th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20024. CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM: Individuals that have submitted proposals to CSREES, either individually or through an academic or other institution, and peer reviewers that evaluate CSREES applicants and their proposals. CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: The system contains records of the project director, the authorized organizational representative, potential proposal reviewers, the proposal and its identifying number, supporting data from the academic institution or other applicant, proposal evaluations from peer reviewers, a review record, financial data, and other related material such as, committee or panel discussion summaries and other agency records containing or reflecting comments on the proposal or the applicants from peer reviewers. AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (NARETPA), 7 U.S.C. 3318. ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: Records in this system may be disclosed to
(1)Federal agencies needing names of potential reviewers or specialists in particular fields;
(2)individuals assisting CSREES staff, either through grant or contract, in the performance of their duties;
(3)Federal agencies as part of the Presidential Management Initiative, E-Grants;
(4)the Department of Justice when:
(a)The agency or any component thereof; or
(b)any employee of the agency in his or her official capacity where the Department of Justice has agreed to represent the employee; or
(c)the United States Government is a party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and by careful review, the agency determines that the records are both relevant and necessary to the litigation and the use of such records by the Department of Justice is therefore deemed by the agency to be for a purpose that is compatible with the purpose for which the agency collected the records;
(5)an appropriate agency, whether Federal, State, or local, charged with the responsibility of investigating or prosecuting a violation of law or rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant thereto, when information available indicates a violation or potential violation of law, whether civil, criminal, or regulatory in nature, and whether arising by general statute or particular program statute, or by rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant to such statute;
(6)in response to a request for discovery or appearance of a witness, to the extent that what is disclosed is relevant to the subject matter involved in a pending judicial or criminal proceeding or in response to a subpoena issued in a proceeding before a court or adjudicative body, to the extent that the records requested are relevant to the proceedings; and
(7)a Member of Congress or to a Congressional staff member in response to an inquiry of the Congressional office made at the written request of the constituent about whom the record is maintained. POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: STORAGE: Records are maintained on system file servers and paper files in the program offices at CSREES, Waterfront Centre, 800 9th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20024. RETRIEVABILITY: Records can be retrieved by name, project leader, co-investigator, and any other data field such as institution or title. SAFEGUARDS: All records containing personal information are maintained in secured file cabinets or are accessed by unique passwords and log-on procedures. Only those employees with a need-to-know in order to perform their duties will be able to access the information. RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: The Data File is cumulative and is maintained indefinitely, and documents are disposed according to agency file plan and disposition schedule. Non-funded proposals are maintained onsite for 1 year and then disposed after 3 years. Funded proposals are maintained onsite for 1 year after completion of the award, and then transferred to the National Archive and Records Administration. SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: Deputy Administrator, Information Systems and Technology Management (ISTM), USDA-CSREES, Stop 2216, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-2216. The address for express mail or overnight courier service is: Deputy Administrator, ISTM, USDA-CSREES, Waterfront Centre, 800 9th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20024. NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: Any individual may request information regarding this system of records or information as to whether the system contains records pertaining to such individual from the System Manager. RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURE: Any individual may gain access to a record in the system that pertains to such individual by submitting a written request to the System Manager. CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: Any individual may contest a record in the system that pertains to such individual by submitting written information to the System Manager. RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: Information in this system is obtained from the individuals submitting the proposals and from peer reviewers. EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: None. [FR Doc. E7-20485 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 030-33266] Notice of Environmental Assessment Related to the Issuance of a License Amendment to Byproduct Material License No. 21-26519-01, for Unrestricted Release of Former Facilities for Aastrom Biosciences, Ann Arbor, MI AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George M. McCann, Senior Health Physicist, Decommissioning Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region III, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2443 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois 60532; telephone:
(630)829-9856; fax number:
(630)515-1259; or by e-mail at *gmm@nrc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC)is considering the issuance of an amendment to NRC Byproduct Materials License No. 21-26519-01. This license is held by Aastrom Biosciences (licensee) for its Gene Therapy Laboratory (the facility) located at 24 Frank Lloyd Wright Drive, Lobby L, Domino's Farm, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Issuance of the amendment would authorize the unrestricted release of the licensee's Gene Therapy Laboratory and associated offices for unrestricted use. The licensee requested this action in a letter dated July 16, 2007. The NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment
(EA)in support of this proposed action in accordance with the requirements of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 51 (10 CFR Part 51). Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate with respect to the proposed action. The amendment will be issued to the licensee following the publication of this FONSI and EA in the **Federal Register** . II. Environmental Assessment Identification of Proposed Action The proposed action would approve the licensee's July 16, 2007, license amendment request, resulting in the release of the facility located at 24 Frank Lloyd Wright Drive, Lobby L, Domino's Farm, Ann Arbor, Michigan for unrestricted use. License No. 21-26519-01 was issued on September 10, 1993, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 30, and has been amended periodically since that time. This license authorized the licensee to use unsealed byproduct materials for conducting research and development activities on laboratory bench tops and in hoods. The licensee's facility is situated in a four-story commercial office building, which is located at 24 Frank Lloyd Wright Drive, Lobby L, Domino's Farm, Ann Arbor, Michigan, and consists of office space and a “Gene Therapy Laboratory.” The site is located in a mixed residential, agricultural and commercial area. Within the facility, use of licensed materials was confined to the Gene Therapy Laboratory, which was approximately 414 square feet. On May 16, 2007, the licensee ceased licensed activities in the Gene Therapy Laboratory and initiated a survey and decontamination of the licensee's facility. Based on the licensee's historical knowledge of the site and the conditions of the facility, the licensee determined that only routine decontamination activities, in accordance with their NRC-approved, operating radiation safety procedures, were required. The licensee was not required to submit a decommissioning plan to the NRC because worker cleanup activities and procedures are consistent with those approved for routine operations. The licensee conducted surveys of the facility and provided information to the NRC to demonstrate that it meets the criteria in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted release. The licensee will continue licensed operations at another approved location. Need for the Proposed Action The licensee has ceased conducting licensed activities at the facility, and seeks the unrestricted use of the facility. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The historical review of licensed research activities conducted at the facility shows that the activities involved only the use of hydrogen-3, which has a half-life greater than 120 days. Prior to performing the final status survey, the licensee conducted decontamination activities, as necessary, in the areas of the facility affected by the hydrogen-3. The licensee conducted a final status survey on May 29, 2007. This survey covered the facility located at 24 Frank Lloyd Wright Drive, Lobby L, Domino's Farm, Ann Arbor, Michigan (ADAMS Accession No. ML072010257). The final status survey report was attached to the Licensee's amendment request dated July 16, 2007. The licensee elected to demonstrate compliance with the radiological criteria for unrestricted release as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 by using the screening approach described in NUREG-1757, “Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance,” Volume 2. The licensee used the radionuclide-specific derived concentration guideline levels (DCGLs), developed there by the NRC, which comply with the dose criterion in 10 CFR 20.1402. These DCGLs define the maximum amount of residual radioactivity on building surfaces, equipment, and materials, and in soils, that will satisfy the NRC requirements in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted release. The licensee's final status survey results were below these DCGLs and are in compliance with the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) requirement of 10 CFR 20.1402. The NRC thus finds that the licensee's final status survey results are acceptable. Based on its review, the staff has determined that the affected environment and any environmental impacts associated with the proposed action are bounded by the impacts evaluated by the “Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facilities” (NUREG-1496) Volumes 1-3 (ML042310492, ML042320379, and ML042330385). The staff finds there were no significant environmental impacts from the use of radioactive material at the facility. The NRC staff reviewed the docket file records and the final status survey report to identify any non-radiological hazards that may have impacted the environment surrounding the facility. No such hazards or impacts to the environment were identified. The NRC has identified no other radiological or non-radiological activities in the area that could result in cumulative environmental impacts. The NRC staff finds that the proposed release of the facility for unrestricted use is in compliance with 10 CFR 20.1402. Based on its review, the staff considered the impact of the residual radioactivity at the facility and concluded that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action Due to the largely administrative nature of the proposed action, its environmental impacts are small. Therefore, the only alternative the staff considered is the no-action alternative, under which the staff would leave things as they are by simply denying the amendment request. This no-action alternative is not feasible because it conflicts with 10 CFR 30.36(d) requiring that decommissioning of byproduct material facilities be completed and approved by the NRC after licensed activities cease. The NRC's analysis of the licensee's final status survey data confirmed that the facility meets the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1402 for unrestricted release. Additionally, denying the amendment request would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the no-action alternative are therefore similar, and the no-action alternative is accordingly not further considered. Conclusion The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action is consistent with the NRC's unrestricted release criteria specified in 10 CFR 20.1402. Because the proposed action will not significantly impact the quality of the human environment, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed action is the preferred alternative. Agencies and Persons Consulted NRC provided a draft of this Environmental Assessment to the Radioactive Material and Medical Waste Materials Unit, Waste and Hazardous Materials Division, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality for review on September 10, 2007. On September 14, 2007, Mr. Robert Skowronek, Chief, Radioactive Material and Medical Waste Materials Unit, Waste and Hazardous Materials Division, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, responded by e-mail. The State agreed with the conclusions of the EA and otherwise had no comments. The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action is of a procedural nature, and will not affect listed species or critical habitat. Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. The NRC staff has also determined that the proposed action is not the type of activity that has the potential to cause effects on historic properties. Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. III. Finding of No Significant Impact The NRC staff has prepared this EA in support of the proposed action. On the basis of this EA, the NRC finds that there are no significant environmental impacts from the proposed action, and that preparation of an environmental impact statement is not warranted. Accordingly, the NRC has determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate. IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, including the application for license amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.* From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS, or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room
(PDR)Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* The documents related to this action are listed below, along with their ADAMS accession numbers. 1. Report on the Final Radiological Status of Areas Being Vacated by Aastrom Biosciences, Inc., dated May 29, 2007 (ADAMS Accession No. ML072010257). 2. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E, “Radiological Criteria for License Termination;” 3. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, “Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions;” 4. NUREG-1496, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facilities;” NUREG-1757, Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance. These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Dated at Lisle, Illinois, this 5th day of October 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Patrick Louden, Chief, Decommissioning Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Region III. [FR Doc. E7-20453 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Independent External Review Panel To Identify Vulnerabilities in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Materials Licensing Program: Meeting Notice AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: NRC will convene a meeting of the Independent External Review Panel to Identify Vulnerabilities in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Materials Licensing Program on October 30, 2007. A sample of agenda items to be discussed during the public session includes:
(1)Background of panel's development;
(2)review of the panel's charter; and
(3)initial planning for future meetings and actions. A copy of the agenda for the meeting can be obtained by e-mailing Mr. Aaron T. McCraw at the contact information below. *Purpose:* Discuss the scope of the review panel's objectives and initiate planning of future meetings and actions. *Date and Time for Closed Sessions:* There will be no closed sessions during this meeting. *Date and Time for Open Sessions:* October 30, 2007, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. *Address for Public Meeting:* U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Two White Flint North Building, Room T3C2, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. *Public Participation:* Any member of the public who wishes to participate in the meeting should contact Mr. McCraw using the information below. *Contact Information:* Aaron T. McCraw, e-mail: *atm@nrc.gov,* telephone:
(301)415-1277. Conduct of the Meeting Mr. Thomas E. Hill will chair the meeting. Mr. Hill will conduct the meeting in a manner that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. The following procedures apply to public participation in the meeting: 1. Persons who wish to provide a written statement should submit an electronic copy to Mr. McCraw at the contact information listed above. All submittals must be received by October 23, 2007, and must pertain to the topic on the agenda for the meeting. 2. Questions and comments from members of the public will be permitted during the meeting, at the discretion of the Chairman. 3. The transcript and written comments will be available for inspection at the NRC Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852-2738, telephone
(800)397-4209, on or about January 30, 2008. 4. Persons who require special services, such as those for the hearing impaired, should notify Mr. McCraw of their planned attendance. This meeting will be held in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (primarily Section 161a); the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App); and the Commission's regulations in Title 10, *U.S. Code of Federal Regulations,* Part 7. Dated: October 11, 2007. Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E7-20448 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC 20549-0213. Extension: Rule 17a-7; SEC File No. 270-147; OMB Control No. 3235-0131. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. Rule 17a-7 (17 CFR 240.17a-7) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a *et seq.* ) requires non-resident broker-dealers registered or applying for registration pursuant to section 15 of the Exchange Act to maintain—in the United States—complete and current copies of books and records required to be maintained under any rule adopted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Alternatively, Rule 17a-7 provides that the non-resident broker-dealer may sign a written undertaking to furnish the requisite books and records to the Commission upon demand. There are approximately 54 non-resident broker-dealers. Based on the Commission's experience in this area, it is estimated that the average amount of time necessary to preserve the books and records required by Rule 17a-7 is one hour per year. Accordingly, the total burden is 54 hours per year. With an average cost per hour of approximately $245, the total cost of compliance for the respondents is $13,230 per year. There are no individual record retention periods in Rule 17a-7. Compliance with the rule is mandatory. However, non-resident broker-dealers may opt to provide the records upon request of the Commission rather than store the records in the United States. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Comments should be directed to
(i)Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or by sending an e-mail to *Alexander_T._Hunt@omb.eop.gov* ; and
(ii)R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an e-mail to: *PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov* . Comments must be submitted within 30 days of this notice. October 11, 2007. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-20457 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Investment Company Act Release No. 28012; 813-326] Raymond James Employee Investment Fund I, L.P., et al.; Notice of Application October 11, 2007. AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”). ACTION: Notice of application for an order under sections 6(b) and 6(e) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) granting an exemption from all provisions of the Act, except section 9, and sections 36 through 53, and the rules and regulations under the Act. With respect to sections 17 and 30 of the Act, and the rules and regulations thereunder, and rule 38a-1 under the Act, the exemption is limited as set forth in the application. Summary of Application: Applicants request an order to exempt certain limited partnerships and other investment vehicles formed for the benefit of eligible employees of Raymond James Financial, Inc. (“RJF”) and its affiliates from certain provisions of the Act. Each partnership or other investment vehicle will be an “employees” securities company” within the meaning of section 2(a)(13) of the Act. Applicants: Raymond James Employee Investment Fund I, L.P. and Raymond James Employee Investment Fund II, L.P. (together, the “Initial Partnerships”), RJF, and RJEIF, Inc. Filing Dates: The application was filed on February 21, 2001, and amended on October 5, 2007. Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary and serving applicant with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on November 5, 2007, and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicant, 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, The Raymond James Financial Center, 880 Carillon Parkway, St. Petersburg, Florida 33716. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura J. Riegel, Senior Counsel, at
(202)551-6873, or Julia K. Gilmer, 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 (telephone
(202)551-5850). Applicants' Representations 1. RJF is a diversified financial services holding company organized under the laws of Florida, whose subsidiaries engage primarily in investment and financial planning, including securities and insurance brokerage, investment banking, asset management, banking and cash management and trust services. RJF and its “Affiliates,” as defined in rule 12b-2 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “1934 Act”), are referred to collectively as “Raymond James.” 2. The Initial Partnerships are limited partnerships organized under the laws of the state of Delaware. RJEIF, Inc. serves as the general partner and investment adviser to the Initial Partnerships. Applicants may offer additional investment vehicles identical in all material respects (other than investment objectives and strategies and form of organization) that may be offered in the future to the same class of investors as those investing in the Initial Partnerships (together with the Initial Partnerships, the “Partnerships”). Each Partnership will be a limited partnership or other investment vehicle formed as an “employees' securities company” within the meaning of section 2(a)(13) and will operate as a closed-end, non-diversified, management investment company. 1 Each Partnership has been established or will be established primarily for the benefit of highly compensated employees of Raymond James as part of a program designed to create capital building opportunities that are competitive with those at other investment banking firms and to facilitate recruitment of high caliber professionals. 1 Applicants also may implement a pretax plan arrangement (“Pretax Plan”). In this case, no investment vehicle will be formed with respect to such Pretax Plan. Pursuant to a Pretax Plan, Raymond James will enter into arrangements with certain Eligible Employees, as defined below, of Raymond James, which will generally provide that
(a)an Eligible Employee will defer a portion of his or her compensation payable by Raymond James,
(b)such deferred compensation will be treated as having been notionally invested in investments designated for these purposes pursuant to the specific compensation plan, and
(c)an Eligible Employee will be entitled to receive cash, securities or other property at the times and in the amounts set forth in the specific compensation plan, where the aggregate amount received by such Eligible Employee would be based upon the investment performance of the investments designated for these purposes pursuant to such compensation plan. The Pretax Plan will not actually purchase or sell any securities. Raymond James expects to offer, through Pretax Plans, economic benefits comparable to what would have been offered in an arrangement where an investment vehicle is formed. For purposes of the application, a Partnership will be deemed to be formed with respect to each Pretax Plan and each reference in the application to “Partnership,” “capital contribution,” “General Partner,” “Limited Partner,” “loans,” and “Interest” will be deemed to refer to the Pretax Plan, the notional capital contribution to the Pretax Plan, Raymond James, a participant of the Pretax Plan, notional loans, and participation rights in the Pretax Plan, respectively. 3. The general partner of each Partnership will be an Affiliate of RJF (“General Partner”). Any partner in a Partnership other than a General Partner is a “Limited Partner” or “Participant.” The General Partner will manage, operate, and control each of the Partnerships. The General Partner will be authorized to delegate investment management responsibility only to a Raymond James entity or a committee of Raymond James employees. The ultimate responsibility for the Partnerships' investments will remain with the General Partner. Any Raymond James entity that is delegated the responsibility of making investment decisions for a Partnership will register as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”) if required under applicable law. The General Partner, Raymond James or any employee of the General Partner or Raymond James may be entitled to receive a performance-based fee (such as a “carried interest”) based on the gains and losses of the investment program or of the Partnership's investment portfolio. 2 All Partnership investments are referred to herein collectively as “Portfolio Investments.” 2 A “carried interest” is an allocation to the General Partner, Limited Partner or the Raymond James entity acting as the investment adviser to a Partnership based on net gains in addition to the amount allocable to such entity in proportion to its capital contributions. A General Partner, Limited Partner or Raymond James entity that is registered as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act may charge a carried interest only if permitted by rule 205-3 under the Advisers Act. Any carried interest paid to a General Partner, Limited Partner or Raymond James entity that is not registered under the Advisers Act also will comply with rule 205-3 as if such General Partner, Limited Partner or Raymond James entity were so registered. 4. Interests in the Partnerships (“Interests”) will be offered without registration in reliance on section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”), or Regulation D under the Securities Act, and will be sold only to “Eligible Employees” and “Qualified Participants,” in each case as defined below, or to Raymond James entities. 3 Prior to offering Interests to an Eligible Employee, the General Partner must reasonably believe that the Eligible Employee will be a sophisticated investor capable of understanding and evaluating the risks of participating in the Partnership without the benefit of regulatory safeguards. 3 If applicants implement a Pretax Plan, participation rights in such Pretax Plan will only be offered to Eligible Employees who are current employees or Consultants, as defined below, of Raymond James. 5. An “Eligible Employee” is
(a)an individual who is a current or former employee, officer, director, or “Consultant” of Raymond James and, except for certain individuals who manage the day-to-day affairs of the Partnership in question (“Managing Employees”) 4 and a limited number of other employees of Raymond James 5 (collectively, “Non-Accredited Investors”), meets the standards of an accredited investor under rule 501(a)(6) of Regulation D under the Securities Act, or
(b)an entity that is a current or former “Consultant” of Raymond James and meets the standards of an accredited investor under rule 501(a) of Regulation D. 6 A Partnership may not have more than 35 Non-Accredited Investors. 4 A Managing Employee may invest in a Partnership if he or she meets the definition of “knowledgeable employee” in rule 3c-5(a)(4) under the Act with the Partnership treated as though it were a “Covered Company” for purposes of the rule. 5 Such employees must meet the sophistication requirements set forth in rule 506(b)(2)(ii) of Regulation D under the Securities Act and may be permitted to invest his or her own funds in the Partnership if, at the time of the employee's investment in a Partnership, he or she
(a)has a graduate degree in business, law or accounting,
(b)has a minimum of five years of consulting, investment banking or similar business experience, and
(c)has had reportable income from all sources of at least $100,000 in each of the two most recent years and a reasonable expectation of income from all sources of at least $140,000 in each year in which such person will be committed to make investments in a Partnership. In addition, such an employee will not be permitted to invest in any year more than 10% of his or her income from all sources for the immediately preceding year in the aggregate in such Partnership and in all other Partnerships in which he or she has previously invested. 6 A “Consultant” is a person or entity whom Raymond James has engaged on retainer to provide services and professional expertise on an ongoing basis as a regular consultant or as a business or legal adviser and who shares a community of interest with Raymond James and Raymond James employees. 6. A “Qualified Participant,” is an individual or entity
(a)that is an Eligible Family Member or Qualified Investment Vehicle (in each case as defined below) of an Eligible Employee, and
(b)if the individual or entity is purchasing an Interest from a Partnership, comes within one of the categories of an “accredited investor” under rule 501(a) of Regulation D. An “Eligible Family Member” is a spouse, parent, child, spouse of child, brother, sister, or grandchild of an Eligible Employee, including step and adoptive relationships. A “Qualified Investment Vehicle” is
(a)a trust of which the trustee, grantor and/or beneficiary is an Eligible Employee,
(b)a partnership, corporation or other entity controlled by an Eligible Employee, or
(c)a trust or other entity established solely for the benefit of Eligible Family Members of an Eligible Employee. 7 7 The inclusion of partnerships, corporations, or other entities controlled by an Eligible Employee in the definition of “Qualified Investment Vehicle” is intended to enable Eligible Employees to make investments in the Partnerships through personal investment vehicles over which they exercise investment discretion or vehicles the management or affairs of which they otherwise control. In the case of a partnership, corporation, or other entity controlled by a Consultant entity, individual participants will be limited to senior level employees, members, or partners of the Consultant who will be required to qualify as an “accredited investor” under rule 501(a)(6) of Regulation D and who will have access to the directors and officers of the General Partner. 7. The terms of a Partnership will be fully disclosed to each Eligible Employee and, if applicable, to a Qualified Participant of the Eligible Employee, in a partnership agreement (the “Partnership Agreement”), which will be furnished at the time the Eligible Employee is invited to participate in the Partnership. Each Partnership will send audited financial statements to each Participant within 120 days or as soon as practicable after the end of its fiscal year, except for any Partnership that was formed to make a single portfolio investment (in which case audited financial statements will be prepared for either the Partnership or the entity that is the single portfolio investment). 8 In addition, as soon as practicable after the end of each tax year of a Partnership, each Participant will receive a report showing the Participant's share of income, credits, deductions, and other tax items. 8 If applicants implement a Pretax Plan, Eligible Employees participating in such Pretax Plan will be furnished with a copy of the Pretax Plan, which will set forth at a minimum the same terms of the proposed investment program as those that would have been set forth in a Partnership Agreement for a Partnership. Raymond James will prepare an audited informational statement with respect to the investments deemed to be made by such Pretax Plan, including, with respect to each investment, the name of the portfolio company and the amount deemed invested by such Pretax Plan in the portfolio company. Raymond James will send each participant of such Pretax Plan a separate statement prepared based on the audited informational statement within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year of Raymond James or as soon as practicable thereafter. 8. Interests in a Partnership will be non-transferable except with the prior written consent of the General Partner. 9 No person will be admitted into a Partnership unless the person is an Eligible Employee, a Qualified Participant of an Eligible Employee, or a Raymond James entity. No sales load will be charged in connection with the sale of Interests. 9 If applicants implement a Pretax Plan, an Eligible Employee's participation rights in such Pretax Plan may not be transferred, other than to a Qualified Participant in the event of the Eligible Employee's death. 9. An Eligible Employee's interest in a Partnership may be subject to repurchase or cancellation if:
(a)The Eligible Employee's relationship with Raymond James is terminated for cause;
(b)the Eligible Employee becomes a consultant to or joins any firm that the General Partner determines, in its reasonable discretion, is competitive with any business of Raymond James; or
(c)the Eligible Employee voluntarily resigns from employment with Raymond James. Upon repurchase or cancellation, the General Partner will pay to the Eligible Employee at least the lesser of
(a)the amount actually paid by the Eligible Employee to acquire the Interest (less prior distributions, plus interest), and
(b)the fair market value of the Interest as determined at the time of repurchase or cancellation by the General Partner. The terms of any repurchase or cancellation will apply equally to any Qualified Participant of an Eligible Employee. 10. Subject to the terms of the applicable Partnership Agreement, a Partnership will be permitted to enter into transactions involving
(a)a Raymond James entity,
(b)a portfolio company,
(c)any Partner or person or entity affiliated with a Partner,
(d)an investment fund or separate account that is organized for the benefit of investors who are not affiliated with Raymond James and over which a Raymond James entity will exercise investment discretion or which is sponsored by a Raymond James entity (“Third Party Fund”), or
(e)any person or entity who is not affiliated with Raymond James and is a partner or other investor in a Third Party Fund or a third party sponsored fund or pooled investment vehicle that is not affiliated with Raymond James (a “Third Party Investor”). Prior to entering into any of these transactions, the General Partner must determine that the terms are fair to the Partners. 11. A Raymond James entity (including the General Partner) acting as agent or broker may receive placement fees, advisory fees, or other compensation from a Partnership or a portfolio company in connection with a Partnership's purchase or sale of securities, provided that such placement fees, advisory fees, or other compensation can be deemed to be “usual and customary.” Such fees or other compensation will be deemed “usual and customary” only if
(a)the Partnership is purchasing or selling securities with other unaffiliated third parties, including Third Party Funds or Third Party Investors, who are similarly purchasing or selling securities,
(b)the fees or other compensation being charged to the Partnership are also being charged to the unaffiliated third parties, including Third Party Funds or Third Party Investors, and
(c)the amount of securities being purchased or sold by the Partnership does not exceed 50% of the total amount of securities being purchased or sold by the Partnership and the unaffiliated third parties, including Third Party Funds and Third Party Investors. Raymond James entities, including the General Partner, also may be compensated for services to entities in which the Partnerships invest and to entities that are competitors of these entities, and may otherwise engage in normal business activities. 12. The Partnerships may borrow from a General Partner or a Raymond James entity. The interest rate on such loans will be no less favorable to the Partnerships than the rate that could be obtained on an arm's length basis. A Partnership will not borrow from any person if the borrowing would cause any person not named in section 2(a)(13) of the Act to own outstanding securities of the Partnership (other than short-term paper). Any borrowing by a Partnership will be non-recourse to the Limited Partners of the Partnership, except indebtedness incurred specifically on behalf of a Limited Partner where such Limited Partner has agreed to guarantee the loan or act as co-obligor on the loan. 13. A Partnership will not invest more than 15% of its assets in securities issued by registered investment companies (with the exception of temporary investments in money market funds). A Partnership will not acquire any security issued by a registered investment company if immediately after the acquisition; the Partnership will own more than 3% of the outstanding voting stock of the registered investment company. Applicants' Legal Analysis 1. Section 6(b) of the Act provides, in part, that the Commission will exempt employees' securities companies from the provisions of the Act to the extent that the exemption is consistent with the protection of investors. Section 6(b) provides that the Commission will consider, in determining the provisions of the Act from which the company should be exempt, the company's form of organization and capital structure, the persons owning and controlling its securities, the price of the company's securities and the amount of any sales load, how the company's funds are invested, and the relationship between the company and the issuers of the securities in which it invests. Section 2(a)(13) defines an employees' securities company, in relevant part, as any investment company all of whose securities (other than short-term paper) are beneficially owned
(a)by current or former employees, or persons on retainer, of one or more affiliated employers,
(b)by immediate family members of such persons, or
(c)by such employer or employers together with any of the persons in
(a)or (b). 2. Section 7 of the Act generally prohibits investment companies that are not registered under section 8 of the Act from selling or redeeming their securities. Section 6(e) of the Act provides that, in connection with any order exempting an investment company from any provision of section 7, certain provisions of the Act, as specified by the Commission, will be applicable to the company and other persons dealing with the company as though the company were registered under the Act. Applicants request an order under sections 6(b) and 6(e) of the Act exempting applicants and any Subsequent Partnerships from all provisions of the Act, except section 9 and sections 36 through 53 of the Act, and the rules and regulations under the Act. With respect to sections 17 and 30 of the Act, and the rules and regulations thereunder, and rule 38a-1 under the Act, the exemption is limited as set forth in the application. 3. Section 17(a) generally prohibits any affiliated person of a registered investment company, or any affiliated person of an affiliated person, acting as principal, from knowingly selling or purchasing any security or other property to or from the company. Applicants request an exemption from section 17(a) to permit:
(a)A Raymond James entity or a Third Party Fund, acting as principal, to engage in any transaction directly or indirectly with any Partnership or any company controlled by the Partnership;
(b)any Partnership to invest in or engage in any transaction with any Raymond James entity, acting as principal,
(i)in which the Partnership, any company controlled by the Partnership, or any Raymond James entity or Third Party Fund has invested or will invest, or
(ii)with which the Partnership, any company controlled by the Partnership, or any Raymond James entity or Third Party Fund is or will become affiliated; and
(c)any Third Party Investor, acting as principal, to engage in any transaction directly or indirectly with a Partnership or any company controlled by the Partnership. 4. Applicants state that an exemption from section 17(a) is consistent with the protection of investors and is necessary to promote the purpose of each Partnership. Applicants state that the Participants in each Partnership will be fully informed of the possible extent of the Partnership's dealings with Raymond James. Applicants also state that, as professionals employed in investment banking and financial planning, Participants in each Partnership will be able to understand and evaluate the attendant risks. Applicants assert that the community of interest among the Participants and Raymond James will provide the best protection against any risk of abuse. 5. Section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act prohibit any affiliated person of a registered investment company, or any affiliated person of such person, acting as principal, from participating in any joint arrangement with the company unless authorized by the Commission. Applicants request relief to permit affiliated persons of each Partnership, or affiliated persons of any of these persons, to participate in any joint arrangement in which the Partnership or a company controlled by the Partnership is a participant. 6. Applicants assert that compliance with section 17(d) would cause the Partnerships to forgo investment opportunities simply because a Participant or other affiliated person of the Partnerships (or any affiliate of the affiliated person) made or is concurrently making a similar investment. Applicants also state that because certain attractive investment opportunities often require that each participant make available funds in an amount substantially greater than that available to one Partnership alone, there may be attractive opportunities that a Partnership may be unable to take advantage of except by co-investing with other persons, including affiliated persons. Applicants assert that the flexibility to structure co-investments and joint investments will not involve abuses of the type section 17(d) and rule 17d-1 were designed to prevent. 7. Co-investments with a Third Party Fund, or by a Raymond James entity pursuant to a contractual obligation to a Third Party Fund, will not be subject to condition 3 below. Applicants note that it is common for a Third Party Fund to require that Raymond James invest its own capital in Third Party Fund investments, and that Raymond James investments be subject to substantially the same terms as those applicable to the Third Party Fund. Applicants believe it is important that the interests of the Third Party Fund take priority over the interests of the Partnerships, and that the Third Party Fund not be burdened or otherwise affected by activities of the Partnerships. In addition, applicants assert that the relationship of a Partnership to a Third Party Fund is fundamentally different from a Partnership's relationship to Raymond James. Applicants contend that the focus of, and the rationale for, the protections contained in the requested relief are to protect the Partnerships from any overreaching by Raymond James in the employer/employee context, whereas the same concerns are not present with respect to the Partnerships and a Third Party Fund. 8. Section 17(e) of the Act and rule 17e-1 under the Act limit the compensation an affiliated person may receive when acting as agent or broker for a registered investment company. Applicants request an exemption from section 17(e) to permit a Raymond James entity (including the General Partner) that acts as an agent or broker to receive placement fees, advisory fees, or other compensation from a Partnership in connection with the purchase or sale by the Partnership of securities, provided that the fees or other compensation can be deemed “usual and customary.” Applicants state that for the purposes of the application, fees or other compensation will be deemed “usual and customary” only if
(a)the Partnership is purchasing or selling securities alongside other unaffiliated third parties, including Third Party Funds or Third Party Investors, who are similarly purchasing or selling securities,
(b)the fees or other compensation being charged to the Partnership are also being charged to the unaffiliated third parties, including Third Party Funds and Third Party Investors, and
(c)the amount of securities being purchased or sold by the Partnership does not exceed 50% of the total amount of securities being purchased or sold by the Partnership and the unaffiliated third parties, including Third Party Funds or Third Party Investors. Applicants assert that, because Raymond James does not wish it to appear as if it is favoring the Partnerships, compliance with section 17(e) would prevent a Partnership from participating in transactions where the Partnership is being charged lower fees than unaffiliated third parties. Applicants assert that the fees or other compensation paid by a Partnership to a Raymond James entity will be the same as those negotiated at arm's length with unaffiliated third parties. 9. Rule 17e-1(b) under the Act requires that a majority of directors who are not “interested persons” (as defined in section 2(a)(19) of the Act) take actions and make approvals regarding commissions, fees, or other remuneration. Rule 17e-1(c) under the Act requires each Partnership to comply with the fund governance standards defined in rule 0-1(a)(7) under the Act. Applicants request an exemption from rule 17e-1 to the extent necessary to permit each Partnership to comply with the rule without having a majority of the directors of the General Partner who are not interested persons take actions and make determinations as set forth in paragraph
(b)of the rule, and without having to satisfy the standards set forth in paragraph
(c)of the rule. Applicants state that because all the directors of the General Partner will be affiliated persons, without the relief requested, a Partnership could not comply with rule 17e-1. Applicants state that each Partnership will comply with rule 17e-1(b) by having a majority of the directors of the Partnership take actions and make approvals as are set forth in rule 17e-1. Applicants state that each Partnership will comply with all other requirements of rule 17e-1. 10. Section 17(f) of the Act designates the entities that may act as investment company custodians, and rule 17f-1 under the Act imposes certain requirements when the custodian is a member of a national securities exchange. Applicants request an exemption from section 17(f) and rule 17f-1 to permit a Raymond James entity to act as custodian of Partnership assets without a written contract, as would be required by rule 17f-1(a). Applicants also request an exemption from the rule 17f-1(b)(4) requirement that an independent accountant periodically verify the assets held by the custodian. Applicants state that, because of the community of interest between Raymond James and the Partnerships and the existing requirement for an independent audit, compliance with these requirements would be unnecessarily burdensome and expensive. Applicants will comply with all other requirements of rule 17f-1. 11. Section 17(g) of the Act and rule 17g-1 under the Act generally require the bonding of officers and employees of a registered investment company who have access to its securities or funds. Rule 17g-1 requires that a majority of directors who are not interested persons take certain actions and give certain approvals relating to fidelity bonding. Applicants request exemptive relief to permit the General Partner's directors, who may be deemed interested persons, to take actions and make determinations set forth in the rule. Applicants state that, because all directors of the General Partner will be affiliated persons, a Partnership could not comply with rule 17g-1 without the requested relief. Specifically, each Partnership will comply with rule 17g-1 by having a majority of the Partnership's directors take actions and make determinations as are set forth in rule 17g-1. Applicants also state that each Partnership will comply with all other requirements of rule 17g-1, except that the Partnerships request an exemption from the requirements of paragraphs
(g)and
(h)or rule 17g-1 relating to the filing of copies of fidelity bonds and related information with the Commission and relating to this provision of notices to the board of directors, and an exemption from the requirements of paragraph (j)(3) of rule 17g-1 that the Partnerships comply with the fund governance standards defined in rule 0-1(a)(7). 12. Section 17(j) of the Act and paragraph
(b)of rule 17j-1 under the Act make it unlawful for certain enumerated persons to engage in fraudulent or deceptive practices in connection with the purchase or sale of a security held or to be acquired by a registered investment company. Rule 17j-1 also requires that every registered investment company adopt a written code of ethics and that every access person of a registered investment company report personal securities transactions. Applicants request an exemption from the provisions of rule 17j-1, except for the anti-fraud provisions of paragraph (b), because they are unnecessarily burdensome as applied to the Partnerships. 13. Applicants request an exemption from the requirements in sections 30(a), 30(b), and 30(e) of the Act, and the rules under those sections, that registered investment companies prepare and file with the Commission and mail to their shareholders certain periodic reports and financial statements. Applicants contend that the forms prescribed by the Commission for periodic reports have little relevance to a Partnership and would entail administrative and legal costs that outweigh any benefit to the Participants. Applicants request exemptive relief to the extent necessary to permit each Partnership to report annually to its Participants. Applicants also request an exemption from section 30(h) of the Act to the extent necessary to exempt the General Partner of each Partnership, directors and officers of the General Partnership and any other persons who may be deemed to be members of an advisory board of a Partnership from filing Forms 3, 4, and 5 under section 16(a) of the 1934 Act with respect to their ownership of Interests in the Partnership. Applicants assert that, because there will be no trading market and the transfers of Interests will be severely restricted, these filings are unnecessary for the protection of investors and burdensome to those required to make them. 14. Rule 38a-1 requires investment companies to adopt, implement and periodically review written policies reasonable designed to prevent violation of the federal securities law and to appoint a chief compliance officer. Each Partnership will comply will rule 38a-1(a),
(c)and (d), except that
(a)because the Partnership does not have a board of directors, the board of directors of the General Partner will fulfill the responsibilities assigned to the Partnership's board of directors under the rule,
(b)because the board of directors of the General Partner does not have any disinterested members, approval by a majority of the disinterested board members required by rule 38a-1 will not be obtained, and
(c)because the board of directors of the General Partner does not have any independent members, the Partnerships will comply with the requirement in rule 38a-1(a)(4)(iv) that the chief compliance officer meet with the independent board members by having the chief compliance officer meet with the board of directors of the General Partner as constituted. Applicants' Conditions Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will be subject to the following conditions: 1. Each proposed transaction otherwise prohibited by section 17(a) or section 17(d) and rule 17d to which a Partnership is a party (the “Section 17 Transactions”) will be effected only if the General Partner determines that:
(a)The terms of the Section 17 Transaction, including the consideration to be paid or received, are fair and reasonable to the Partners of the participating Partnership and do not involve overreaching of such Partnership or its Partners on the part of any person concerned; and
(b)The Section 17 Transaction is consistent with the interests of the Partners of the participating Partnership, such Partnership's organizational documents and such Partnership's reports to its Partners. In addition, the General Partner will record and will preserve a description of all Section 17 Transactions, the General Partner's findings and the information or materials upon which the General Partner's findings are based and the basis for the findings. All such records will be maintained for the life of the Partnership and at least six years thereafter, and will be subject to examination by the Commission and its staff. Each Partnership will preserve the accounts, books and other documents required to be maintained in an easily accessible place for the first two years. 2. In connection with the Section 17 Transactions, the General Partner will adopt, and periodically review and update, procedures designed to ensure that reasonable inquiry is made, prior to the consummation of any Section 17 Transaction, with respect to the possible involvement in the transaction of any affiliated person or promoter of or principal underwriter for such Partnership, or any affiliated person of such a person, promoter or principal underwriter. 3. The General Partner will not make on behalf of a Partnership any investment in which a “ Co-Investor” with respect to any Partnership (as defined below) has acquired or proposes to acquire the same class of securities of the same issuer, where the investment involves a joint enterprise or other joint arrangement within the meaning of rule 17d-1 in which such Partnership and the Co-Investor are participants, unless any such Co-Investor, prior to disposing of all or part of its investment,
(a)gives such General Partner sufficient, but not less than one day's notice of its intent to dispose of its investment; and
(b)refrains from disposing of its investment unless the participating Partnership holding such investment has the opportunity to dispose of its investment prior to or concurrently with, on the same terms as, and on a *pro rata* basis with the Co-Investor. The term “Co-Investor” with respect to any Partnership means any person who is:
(a)An “affiliated person” (as defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Act) of such Partnership (other than a Third Party Fund);
(b)a Raymond James entity;
(c)an officer or director of a Raymond James entity; or
(d)an entity (other than a Third Party Fund) in which the General Partner acts as a general partner or has a similar capacity to control the sale or other disposition of the entity's securities. The restrictions contained in this condition, however, shall not be deemed to limit or prevent the disposition of an investment by a Co-Investor:
(a)To its direct or indirect wholly-owned subsidiary, to any company (a “Parent”) of which such Co-Investor is a direct or indirect wholly-owned subsidiary, or to a direct or indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of its Parent;
(b)to immediate family members of such Co-Investor, including step and adoptive relationships, or to a trust or other investment vehicle established for any such immediate family member;
(c)when the investment is comprised of securities that are listed on any exchange registered as a national securities exchange under section 6 of the 1934 Act;
(d)when the investment is comprised of securities that are national market system securities pursuant to section 11A(a)(2) of the 1934 Act and rule 11Aa2-1 thereunder;
(e)when the investment is comprised of securities that are listed or traded on any foreign securities exchange or board of trade that satisfies regulatory requirements under the law of the jurisdiction in which such foreign securities exchange or board of trade is organized similar to those that apply to a national securities exchange or a national market system for securities; or
(f)when the investment is comprised of securities that are government securities as defined in section 2(a)(16) of the Act. 4. Each Partnership and its General Partner will maintain and preserve, for the life of such Partnership and at least six years thereafter, such accounts, books, and other documents as constitute the record forming the basis for the audited financial statements that are to be provided to the Participants in such Partnership, and each annual report of such Partnership required to be sent to such Participants, and agree that all such records will be subject to examination by the Commission and its staff. Each Partnership will preserve the accounts, books and other documents required to be maintained in an easily accessible place for the first two years. 5. The General Partner of each Partnership will send to each Participant in that Partnership, at any time during the fiscal year then ended, Partnership financial statements audited by such Partnership's independent accountants, except in the case of a Partnership formed to make a single Portfolio Investment. In such cases, financial statements will be unaudited, but each Participant will receive financial statements of the single Portfolio Investment audited by such entity's independent accountants. At the end of each fiscal year, the General Partner will make a valuation or have a valuation made of all of the assets of the Partnership as of such fiscal year end in a manner consistent with customary practice with respect to the valuation of assets of the kind held by the Partnership. In addition, within 120 days after the end of each fiscal year of each Partnership or as soon as practicable thereafter, the General Partner will send a report to each person who was a Participant at any time during the fiscal year then ended, setting forth such tax information as shall be necessary for the preparation by the Participant of his, her or its U.S. federal and state income tax returns and a report of the investment activities of the Partnership during that fiscal year. 6. If a Partnership makes purchases or sales from or to an entity affiliated with the Partnership by reason of an officer, director or employee of Raymond James
(a)serving as an officer, director, general partner or investment adviser of the entity, or
(b)having a 5% or more investment in the entity, such individual will not participate in the Partnership's determination of whether or not to effect the purchase or sale. For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, under delegated authority. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-20444 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56640; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-118] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Its Marketing Fee Program October 11, 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 October 1, 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 establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by CBOE under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change CBOE proposes to amend its Marketing Fee Program. 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 Recently, CBOE amended its Marketing Fee Program to, among other things, collect an administrative fee to offset its costs in administering the marketing fee program and also to provide funds to the association of members for its costs and expenses in supporting CBOE's marketing fee program and in seeking to bring order flow to CBOE. 5 Under the amended Marketing Fee Program, CBOE collects an administrative fee of .45% on the total amount of funds collected each month prior to making the remaining funds available to DPMs and Preferred Market-Makers to attract orders to CBOE. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Release No. 56289 (August 20, 2007), 72 FR 49030 (August 27, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-95). CBOE now proposes to limit the total amount that any Market-Maker, RMM, e-DPM, or DPM would contribute to the administrative fee. Specifically, CBOE proposes to amend its Marketing Fee Program such that no Market-Maker, RMM, e-DPM, or DPM would contribute more than 15% of the total amount collected by the .45% administrative fee. As amended, if the assessment of CBOE's marketing fee resulted in any Market-Maker, RMM, e-DPM or DPM contributing more than 15% of the funds collected for the administrative fee, the amount of money in excess of the 15% would not be allocated to the administrative fee and instead would be allocated to the DPMs or Preferred Market-Makers to attract orders to CBOE. The following is an example of how this 15% limit would be applied, where there is one DPM and three Market-Makers on CBOE, and collectively they generated $100,000 in marketing fee funds in August. The administration fee of .45% would be collected from the total amount of funds collected, *i.e.* , $100,000, resulting in $450. Assume that based on their trading in August, the DPM accounted for 70%, or $70,000, of the marketing fee funds collected in August, and each of the Market-Makers accounted for 10%, or $10,000 each. CBOE would then determine whether the DPM or any of the Market-Makers contributed more than 15% of the total funds collected and allocated to the .45% admin fee (15% of $450 is $67.50). In this case, because the DPM accounted for 70% of the marketing fee funds available in August, the DPM also would have accounted for 70% of the $450 administration fee (or $315), since the administration fee is a percentage taken from the total amount of marketing fee funds collected in August. 6 6 A Market-Maker's, RMM's, e-DPM's or DPM's percentage contribution to the total amount of marketing fee funds collected in a month is directly proportional to its percentage contribution to the funds collected as part of the administration fee. Because the DPM would have contributed more than 15% of the total amount of funds raised by the .45% administrative fee, would be capped at $67.50, and the balance of $247.50 ($315−$67.50) would be provided to DPMs and Preferred Market-Makers to pay for order flow. Accordingly, in August the administration fee amount would be $202.50 instead of $450. CBOE intends to calculate the 15% limit on a firm-wide basis. If a member organization and its nominees operate on the Exchange in various approved statuses, such as a Market-Maker, RMM, DPM or e-DPM, CBOE intends to aggregate it and its nominees' activity to determine if the member firm exceeded the 15% limit. CBOE believes that limiting the total amount that any Market-Maker, RMM, DPM, or e-DPM would contribute to the administrative fee is fair and reasonable and an equitable allocation of fees. CBOE proposes to implement these changes to the marketing fee program beginning on October 1, 2007. CBOE is not amending its marketing fee program in any other respects. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 7 in general, and Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 8 in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among CBOE members. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 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 a fee change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 9 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 10 thereunder, because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange. 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 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. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 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-2007-118 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-2007-118. 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 on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of CBOE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2007-118 and should be submitted on or before November 7, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-20458 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56641; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-117] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Its Marketing Fee Program in Connection With the Expansion of the Penny Pilot Program October 11, 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 28, 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 establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by CBOE under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change CBOE proposes to amend its Marketing Fee Program in connection with the expansion of the Penny Pilot Program. 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 CBOE proposes to amend its marketing fee program in connection with the expansion of the Penny Pilot Program. Currently, CBOE assesses a marketing fee of $.10 per contract in the 13 Penny Pilot classes, except for QQQQ options and IWM options in which CBOE does not assess any marketing fee. 5 5 The Exchange notes that prior to the Penny Pilot commencing in late January 2007, the marketing fee was not assessed in these two classes. On September 28, 2007, the Penny Pilot Program expanded by adding 22 option classes, including two ETFs in which CBOE does not assess the marketing fee, namely the Energy Select Sector SPDR
(XLE)and the Financial Select Sector SPDR (XLF). 6 CBOE proposes to amend Footnote 6 of its Fee Schedule to note that XLE and XLF are not among the Penny Pilot classes in which it assesses a $.10 per contract marketing fee, similar to QQQQ options and IWM options. All other option classes being added to the Penny Pilot Program, including DIA options and SPY options, will be assessed the marketing fee at a rate of $.10 per contract. 6 *See* Securities Exchange Release No. 56565 (September 27, 2007), 72 FR 56403 (October 3, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-117) (approving expansion of Penny Pilot Program). CBOE also proposes to make a non-substantive change to the text of Footnote 6 of its Fee Schedule to delete references to “LMM” because LMMs are not appointed in any option classes in which the marketing fee is assessed. CBOE is not amending its marketing fee program in any other respects. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 7 in general, and Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 8 in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among CBOE members and other persons using its facilities. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 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 a fee change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 9 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 10 thereunder, because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange. 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 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. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 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-2007-117 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-2007-117. 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 on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of CBOE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2007-117 and should be submitted on or before November 7, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-20459 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56639; File No. SR-NASD-2007-035] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (n/k/a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.); Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Related to Mandated Use of an Automated Liability Notification System October 11, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on May 25, 2007, the National Association of Securities Dealers (“NASD”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared primarily by the NASD. 3 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested parties. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 On July 26, 2007, the Commission approved a proposed rule change filed by NASD to amend NASD's Certificate of Incorporation to reflect its name change to Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., or FINRA, in connection with the consolidation of the member firm regulatory functions of NASD and NYSE Regulation, Inc. See Exchange Act Release No. 56146 (July 26, 2007); 72 FR 42190 (Aug. 1, 2007). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change NASD is proposing to amend Rule 11810(i) to mandate the use of the automated liability notification system of a registered clearing agency when issuing liability notices in connection with certain securities transactions provided both parties to the contract are participants in a registered clearing agency that has such an automated system. 4 4 Proposed new rule text is attached to NASD's filing as Exhibit 1 and can be found at * http:// www.finra.org/RulesRegulation/RuleFilings/index.htm * . 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 NASD included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. NASD has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and
(C)below, of the most significant aspects of these statements. 5 5 The Commission has modified portions of the text of the summaries prepared by the NASD.
(A)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
(1)Purpose NASD Rule 11810(i) sets forth the procedures that must be followed when a party is owed securities that have become the subject of a voluntary corporate action, such as a tender or exchange offer. Under Rule 11810(i), the owed party delivers a liability notice to the owing or failing party. The liability notice sets a cut off date for the delivery of the securities by the owing party and provides notice to the owing party that the counterparty will be held liable for any damages caused by its failure to deliver the securities in time for the owed party to participate in the voluntary corporate action. If the owing party delivers the securities in response to the liability notice, it has met its delivery obligation. If the owing party fails to deliver the securities in sufficient time for the owed party to participate in the voluntary corporate action, it will be liable for any damages that may accrue thereby ( *i.e.* , in lieu of delivering the securities the owing party must deliver proceeds equivalent to the proceeds that the owed party would have received if it had been able to participate in the offer). The owed party has the responsibility to communicate its intentions to the owing party and to prove, if necessary, that the owing party received the liability notice. Rule 11810(i) currently requires broker-dealers to send liability notices using “electronic media having immediate receipt capabilities.” Although there is currently no one acceptable means for sending and tracking liability notices, NASD members have advised that it is industry practice to send liability notices by fax to the failing counterparty. Sending liability notices by fax is a manual, paper-intensive process that is subject to error. For example, the fax may be directed to the wrong department and not timely received by the correct department, or sent to the correct department but overlooked by the responsible person(s). In other cases, the receiver may not notify the sender that the fax has been received, and the sender must follow up with another fax or telephone call or both. The financial risk to an owing firm that misses or incorrectly processes a liability notice relating to a voluntary corporate action can be considerable, since the corporate action may involve hundreds of shareholders. In response to industry need for a reliable and uniform method of transmitting liability notices, The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) developed SMART/Track for Corporate Action Liability Notification Service (“SMART/Track”). SMART/Track is a web-based system for the communication of corporate action liability notices that allows DTC participants and the clearing members of the National Securities Clearing Corporation to create, send, process and tract such notices. 6 Transmitting liability notices through SMART/Track eliminates paper liability notices and provides firms with an electronic, centralized system for the distribution, management and control of liability notices and helps reduce the risks, costs, and delays resulting from missing or inaccurate information associated with paper corporate action liability notices. Specifically, SMART/Track provides participants with
(1)more timely receipt and distribution of corporation action liability notifications;
(2)a centralized system to manage and control all liability notifications on all issues;
(3)immediate identification of the security affected by a corporate action liability notification;
(4)detailed disclosure and clearer explanation of the terms and conditions of the corporate action; and
(5)an audit trail with a complete record of actions taken regarding a liability notice. 6 Currently DTC is the only registered clearing agency operating an automated corporate liability notification service. As proposed, NASD Rule 11810(i) will mandate the use of the automated liability notification system of a registered clearing agency when the parties to a contract are both participants in a registered clearing agency that has an automated service for corporate action liability notices. When either or both parties to a contract are not participants in a registered clearing agency that has an automated service for corporate action liability notices, Rule 11810(i) will continue to require the liability notice to be issued using written or comparable electronic media having immediate receipt capabilities. NASD proposes to announce the effective date of the proposed rule change in a “Notice to Members” that will be published no later than sixty days following the date of approval of the proposed rule change by the Commission. The NASD anticipates that the effective date of the proposed rule change will be thirty days following publication of the Notice to Members announcing the Commission's approval of the proposed rule change.
(2)Statutory Basis The statutory basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is the requirement under Section 15A of the Act, which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities association are 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 perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and in general to protect investors and the public interest. 7 NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of the Act in that SMART/Track will eliminate the use of paper corporate action liability notices and will provide firms with an electronic, centralized system to distribute, manage, and control liability notices. In addition to reducing the risks, costs, and delays resulting from missing or inaccurate information associated with paper corporate action liability notices, SMART/Track gives firms detailed disclosure of the terms and conditions of the corporate action, enables firms to more timely receive and distribute corporate action liability notices, and provides an audit trail with a complete record of actions taken regarding a liability notice. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
(B)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
(C)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within thirty-five days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period
(i)as the Commission may designate up to ninety days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii)as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
(A)By order approve such proposed rule change or
(B)Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ) or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NASD-2007-035 in the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2007-035. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 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 filings also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the NASD and on NASD's Web site, *http://www.finra.org/RulesRegulation/RuleFilings/index.htm.* All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2007-035 and should be submitted on or before November 7, 2007. For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 8 8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-20385 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56644; File No. SR-FINRA-2007-016] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Reflect the Closing of the NASD/BSE Trade Reporting Facility October 11, 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 October 9, 2007, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) (f/k/a the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”)) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared substantially by FINRA. FINRA has submitted the proposed rule change under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 5 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). 5 FINRA has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay provided in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change FINRA proposes to delete in their entirety the NASD Rule 4000D, 6000D, and 7000D Series and the Limited Liability Company Agreement of The NASD/BSE Trade Reporting Facility LLC (the “NASD/BSE TRF LLC Agreement”), in light of the recent closing of the NASD/BSE Trade Reporting Facility (the “NASD/BSE TRF”). 6 6 Effective July 30, 2007, FINRA was formed through the consolidation of NASD and the member regulatory functions of NYSE Regulation, Inc. Accordingly, from that date until the date it closed on September 21, 2007, the NASD/BSE TRF was doing business as the FINRA/BSE TRF. The text of the proposed rule change is available at *http://www.finra.org,* at the principal offices of FINRA, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, FINRA included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. FINRA has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The NASD/BSE TRF was approved by the Commission 7 and commenced operation in February 2007 to provide members with a mechanism for reporting locked-in trades in NMS stocks, as defined in Rule 600(b)(47) of Regulation NMS under the Act, 8 effected otherwise than on an exchange. The Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (“BSE”), the “Business Member” under the NASD/BSE TRF LLC Agreement, determined to close the NASD/BSE TRF for business reasons. Accordingly, as of the close of business on September 21, 2007, the NASD/BSE TRF ceased accepting trade reports. 9 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54931 (December 13, 2006), 71 FR 76409 (December 20, 2006) (order approving File No. SR-NASD-2006-115). 8 17 CFR 242.600(b)(47). 9 Although the NASD/BSE TRF is no longer operating, pursuant to the termination provisions in the NASD/BSE TRF LLC Agreement, the NASD/BSE Trade Reporting Facility LLC will continue its corporate existence until October 30, 2007. FINRA members were given prior notice of the closing and were further notified that any members using the NASD/BSE TRF to report trades were required to find an alternative mechanism to satisfy their trade reporting obligations. Prior to September 21, 2007, FINRA and BSE staff worked to ensure that FINRA members that had been reporting trades to the NASD/BSE TRF were transitioned to another FINRA facility. FINRA represents that, notwithstanding the closing of the NASD/BSE TRF, FINRA is able to fulfill all of its regulatory obligations with respect to over-the-counter trade reporting through its other facilities, *i.e.* , the Alternative Display Facility, the NASD/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility, the NASD/NSX Trade Reporting Facility, and the NASD/NYSE Trade Reporting Facility. Accordingly, FINRA proposes to delete the NASD Rule 4000D and 6000D Series relating to trade reporting to the NASD/BSE TRF and the NASD Rule 7000D Series relating to fees and credits for use of the NASD/BSE TRF. In addition, FINRA proposes to delete the NASD/BSE TRF LLC Agreement, a copy of which is included in the Manual. The proposed rule change will ensure that FINRA's rules accurately reflect only the FINRA facilities that are available to members for trade reporting. 10 10 On September 12, 2007, FINRA filed a proposed rule change, SR-FINRA-2007-012, proposing certain changes to its trade reporting rules, including NASD Rule 6130D. *See* SR-FINRA-2007-012, available at *http://www.finra.org/RulesRegulation/RuleFilings/2007RuleFilings/P036903.* FINRA will file an amendment to SR-FINRA-2007-012 to delete the references to the NASD/BSE TRF and the proposed changes to NASD Rule 6130D contained in that filing. FINRA has filed the proposed rule change for immediate effectiveness and requested a waiver of the 30-day operative delay. FINRA proposes that the proposed rule change be operative on the date of filing. 2. Statutory Basis FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act, 11 which requires, among other things, that FINRA rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. FINRA believes that by deleting rules that apply to a FINRA facility that is no longer in operation, the proposed rule change will prevent potential member confusion and trade reporting errors and violations. 11 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action FINRA has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 12 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder. 13 Because FINRA has designated the foregoing proposed rule change as one that:
(1)Does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)does not impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)does not become operative for 30 days from the date of filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. As required under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), FINRA provided the Commission with written notice of its intention to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to filing the proposal with the Commission or such shorter period as designated by the Commission. 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 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. FINRA has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay to expedite the deletion of rules that applied to the NASD/BSE TRF, a FINRA facility that is no longer in operation, thereby preventing potential member confusion and trade reporting errors and violations. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because the proposal will delete rules that applied to the NASD/BSE TRF, a FINRA facility that ceased operations on September 21, 2007. 14 Accordingly, the Commission believes that the proposal will ensure that FINRA's rules accurately reflect the FINRA trade reporting facilities that are in operation currently and available to accept trade reports. For these reasons, the Commission designates the proposal to be operative on filing with the Commission. 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 such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-FINRA-2007-016 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2007-016. 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 FINRA. 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 publicly available. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2007-016 and should be submitted on or before November 7, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-20406 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56646; File No. SR-ISE-2007-96] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Payment for Order Flow Fees October 11, 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 October 9, 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 the Exchange. ISE has designated this proposal as one establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by ISE under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The ISE is proposing to amend its payment for order flow program. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *www.iseoptions.com.* II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for the proposed rule change, and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The ISE 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 The Exchange currently has a payment-for-order-flow (“PFOF”) program that helps its market makers establish PFOF arrangements with an EAM (“Electronic Access Member”) in exchange for that EAM preferencing some or all of its order flow to that market maker. This program is funded through a fee paid by Exchange market makers for each customer contract they execute, and is administered by both Primary Market Makers (“PMM”) 5 and Competitive Market Makers (“CMM”), 6 depending on who the order is preferenced to. Further, the maximum amount of PFOF fees currently collected by the exchange for PMMs and CMMs to administer is $450,000 and $50,000, respectively. When the pool balance exceeds these threshold levels, ISE rebates funds proportionately to those who have paid the PFOF fees. The Exchange states that it closely monitors the levels of the cap to ensure that there are adequate funds available to market makers to be competitive. In order to allow the Exchange's market makers to better compete in attracting order flow to the Exchange, it proposes to adopt a uniform PFOF cap of $100,000 for both its PMM- and CMM-administered pools.The Exchange believes that the PMM ceiling of $450,000 is a considerable amount of money, and thus seeks to reduce that amount to $100,000. With regard to the CMM ceiling, the Exchange believes that $50,000 is too little an amount for these market makers to better compete in attracting order flow and thus proposes to raise that ceiling to $100,000. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43833 (January 10, 2001), 66 FR 7822 (January 25, 2001) (SR-ISE-00-10). 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53127 (January 13, 2006), 71 FR 3582 (January 23, 2006) (SR-ISE-2005-57). Additionally, the Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule to reflect that PFOF funds are rebated on a monthly basis, instead of on a quarterly basis. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 7 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 8 in particular, because it is an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among exchange members and other persons using exchange facilities. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange believes 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 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 a fee change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 9 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 10 thereunder, because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange. 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 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. 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). 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-2007-96 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-2007-96. 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 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-2007-96 and should be submitted on or before November 7, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 11 11 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-20460 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56642; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-100] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Exchange Fees and Charges October 11, 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 October 1, 2007, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. NYSE Arca has designated this proposal as one establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by NYSE Arca under section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change NYSE Arca proposes to amend its Schedule of Fees and Charges for Exchange Services (“Fee Schedule”). The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.nysearca.com* . II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. NYSE Arca has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose NYSE Arca states that the purpose of this filing is to amend the existing Fee Schedule by eliminating the Marketing Charges associated with options on the S&P 500 Index (SPY). The Exchange also proposes to revise a footnote in the Fee Schedule that references the Penny Pilot program. The Exchange presently assesses a $1.00 per contract Marketing Charge on certain Market Maker transactions in options that overlie the S&P 500 Index (SPY). As per the Fee Schedule, the Exchange does not assess Marketing Charges on issues that trade as part of the Penny Pilot Program (“Pilot”). On September 28, 2007, options on SPY were included in the Pilot. Therefore, the Exchange will no longer assess a Marketing Fee on SPY options. In addition, in the Transaction Fees section on the Fee Schedule, the Exchanges lists fees that are specific to the Pilot. The original Pilot expired on July 27, 2007 and was extended through September 27, 2007. The Exchange has received approval to once again extend the Pilot, this time until March 27, 2009. 5 A footnote referencing the expiration date of the Pilot is included on the Fee Schedule, and has been revised each time the Pilot was extended. The Exchange now proposes to remove the expiration date of the Pilot in the associated footnote and instead reference NYSEArca Rule 6.72. The terms of the Pilot, including any expiration date, are contained in Rule 6.72 and are revised each time the Pilot is extended. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56568 (September 27, 2007), 72 FR 56422 (October 3, 2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-88). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act 6 in general, and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(4) of the Act 7 in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among NYSE Arca members. 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change has been designated as a fee change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 8 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 9 thereunder, because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge imposed on members by the Exchange. 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 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)(ii). 9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-100 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-100. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-100 and should be submitted on or before November 7, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 10 10 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-20445 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [License No. 02/72-0625] Founders Equity SBIC I, L.P.; Notice Seeking Exemption Under Section 312 of the Small Business Investment Act, Conflicts of Interest Notice is hereby given that Founders Equity SBIC I, L.P., 711 Fifth Avenue, 5th Floor, New York, NY 10022, a Federal Licensee under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended (“the Act”), in connection with the financing of a small concern, has sought an exemption under section 312 of the Act and section 107.730, Financings which Constitute Conflicts of Interest of the Small Business Administration (“SBA”) Rules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.730). Founders Equity SBIC I, L.P. proposes to provide equity security financing to CORE Business Technology Solutions, Inc., 201 West 103rd Street, Suite 240, Indianapolis, IN 46290. The financing is contemplated as part of a capital restructuring of the company. The financing is brought within the purview of § 107.730(a) of the Regulations because Founders Equity NY, L.P., an Associate of Founders Equity SBIC I, L.P., owns more than ten percent of CORE Business Technology Solutions, Inc., and therefore CORE Business Technology Solutions, Inc. is considered an Associate of Founders Equity SBIC I, L.P. as defined in § 107.50 of the Regulations. Notice is hereby given that any interested person may submit written comments on the transaction to the Associate Administrator for Investment, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416. Dated: September 25, 2007. A. Joseph Shepard, Associate Administrator for Investment. [FR Doc. E7-20454 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary [Docket No. OST-2004-16951] Notice of Request for Renewal of a Previously Approved Collection AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation. ACTION: Notice, correction. SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary published a document in the **Federal Register** on October 9, 2007, concerning a request for a renewal of a previously approved information collection. We are correcting the document as set forth below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauralyn Remo, Air Carrier Fitness Division (X-56), Office of Aviation Analysis, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
(202)366-9721. Correction In the October 9, 2007, **Federal Register** [72 FR 57375], correct the Estimate Total Burden on Respondents to read: *Total Annual Responses:* 5,988. Issued in Washington, DC on October 11, 2007. Todd M. Homan, Director, Office of Aviation Analysis. [FR Doc. E7-20501 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular 33.75-1A, Guidance Material for 14 CFR 33.75, Safety Analysis AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of issuance of advisory circular. SUMMARY: This notice announces the issuance of Advisory Circular
(AC)33.75-1A, Guidance Material for 14 CFR 33.75. This advisory circular
(AC)provides guidance and describes acceptable methods, but not the only methods, for demonstrating compliance with the safety analysis requirements of § 33.75 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The information provided in this AC replaces the guidance in AC 33.75-1, issued on March 4, 2005. DATES: The Engine and Propeller Directorate issued AC 33.75-1A on September 26, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Federal Aviation Administration, Attn: Robert Grant, Engine and Propeller Standards Staff, ANE-110, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299; telephone:
(781)238-7739; fax
(781)238-7199; e-mail: *robert.grant@faa.gov.* We have filed in the docket all substantive comments received, and a report summarizing them. If you wish to review the docket in person, you may go to the above address between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you wish to contact the above individual directly, you can use the above telephone number or e-mail address provided. *How to Obtain Copies:* A paper copy of AC 33.75-1A may be obtained by writing to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Subsequent Distribution Office, DOT Warehouse, SVC-121.23, Ardmore East Business Center, 3341Q 75th Ave., Landover, MD 20785, telephone 301-322-5377, or by faxing your request to the warehouse at 301-386-5394. The AC will also be available on the Internet at *http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies* (then click on “Advisory Circulars”. (Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44704). Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on September 26, 2007. Thomas A. Boudreau, Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 07-5103 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 21
Traces to 21 documents
U.S. Code
- Records management by agency heads; general duties§ 3101
- General authority of Foundation§ 1870
- Contract, grant, and cooperative agreement authorities§ 3318
- General responsibilities for records management§ 2904
- Records maintained on individuals§ 552a
- Scholarships and graduate fellowships§ 1869
- Graduate fellowships§ 3915
- Purposes§ 3501
- Short title§ 78a
- Registration, responsibilities, and oversight of self-regulatory organizations§ 78s
- National securities exchanges§ 78f
- Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings§ 552
- Registered securities associations§ 78o–3
- Definitions and application§ 78c
- Federal Aviation Administration§ 106
CFR
- Radiological criteria for unrestricted use.§ 20.1402
- Expiration and termination of licenses and decommissioning of sites and separate buildings or outdoor areas.§ 30.36
- Delegation of authority to Director of Division of Trading and Markets.§ 200.30-3
- NMS security designation and definitions.§ 242.600
- Financings which constitute conflicts of interest.§ 107.730
- Safety analysis.§ 33.75
7 references not yet in our index
- 45 CFR 613
- 5 CFR 613
- 10 CFR 51
- 10 CFR 30
- 10 CFR 20
- 17 CFR 240.17
- 17 CFR 240.19
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of a new Privacy Act System of Records NSF-72: Research
Cite45 CFR 613
Cite5 CFR 613
Cite10 CFR 51
Cites 28 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources