Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2007-12-13 · Bureau of Land Management, Interior · Notices

Notices. Notice of Public Meetings

37,738 words·~172 min read·/register/2007/12/13/07-6037

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

BILLING CODE 4310-JB-M DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [CO-150-08-1110-AL] Notice of Public Meetings, Southwest Colorado Resource Advisory Council Meetings AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Public Meetings. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management
(BLM)Southwest Colorado Resource Advisory Council
(RAC)will meet as indicated below. DATES: The Southwest Colorado RAC meetings will be held February 8, 2008; May 20, 2008; August 8, 2008; and November 14, 2008. ADDRESSES: The Southwest Colorado RAC meetings will be held February 8, 2008, at the Dolores Field Office, located at 29211 Highway 184, Dolores, CO; May 30, 2008, at the Holiday Inn Express, located at 1391 S. Townsend Avenue, in Montrose, CO; August 8, 2008, at the Chipeta Sun Lodge, 304 S. Lena, in Ridgway, CO; and November 14, 2008, at the Fred R. Field Western Heritage Center Concrete Room, 275 S. Spruce Street, in Gunnison, CO. The Southwest Colorado RAC meetings will begin at 9 a.m. and adjourn at approximately 4 p.m. Public comment periods regarding matters on the agenda will be at 2:30 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Sharrow, BLM Uncompahgre field manager, 2505 S. Townsend Avenue, Montrose, CO; telephone 970-240-5300; or Melodie Lloyd, Public Affairs Specialist, 2815 H Road, Grand Junction, CO, telephone 970-244-3097. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Southwest Colorado RAC advises the Secretary of the Interior, through the Bureau of Land Management, on a variety of public land issues in Colorado. Topics of discussion for all Southwest Colorado RAC meetings may include field manager and working group reports, recreation, fire management, land use planning, invasive species management, energy and minerals management, travel management, wilderness, land exchange proposals, cultural resource management, and other issues as appropriate. These meetings are open to the public. The public may present written comments to the RACs. Each formal RAC meeting will also have time, as identified above, allocated for hearing public comments. Depending on the number of persons wishing to comment and time available, the time for individual oral comments may be limited. Dated: November 29, 2007. Barbara Sharrow, Uncompahgre Field Manager, Designated Federal Officer, Southwest Colorado RAC. [FR Doc. E7-24051 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [OR-130-1020-AL; GP8-0034] Notice of Public Meeting, Eastern Washington Resource Advisory Council Meeting AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior. ACTION: Notice of public meeting. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management
(BLM)Eastern Washington Resource Advisory Council will meet as indicated below. DATES: Thursday, January 17, 2008, at the BLM Spokane District Office, 1103 N. Fancher Rd., Spokane Valley, WA 99212. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting will start at 9 a.m., end at approximately 3 p.m. The meeting will be open to the public and there will be an opportunity for public comments at 2:30 p.m. Discussion will focus on the status of projects of interest and identification of topics for future meetings. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Pavey or Sandie Gourdin, BLM, Spokane District, 1103 N. Fancher Rd., Spokane Valley, WA 99212, or call
(509)536-1200. Dated: December 7, 2007. Robert B. Towne, District Manager. [FR Doc. E7-24136 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-33-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [NV-050-5853-ES; N-83051; 8-08807; TAS:14X5232] Notice of Realty Action: Lease/Conveyance for Recreation and Public Purposes, Clark County, NV AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Realty Action. SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management
(BLM)has examined and found suitable for classification for lease and subsequent conveyance under the provisions of the Recreation and Public Purposes (R&PP) Act, as amended, approximately 10 acres of public land in Clark County, Nevada. Gurdwara Baba Deep Singh, Inc. proposes to use the land for a church and fellowship hall. DATES: Interested parties may submit written comments regarding the proposed lease/conveyance or classification of the lands until January 28, 2008. ADDRESSES: Mail written comments to the BLM Las Vegas Field Manager, Las Vegas Field Office, 4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive, Las Vegas, NV 89130. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip Rhinehart,
(702)515-5182. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with section 7 of the Taylor Grazing Act (43 U.S.C. 315f), and Executive Order No. 6910, the following described land in Clark County, Nevada, has been examined and found suitable for classification for lease and subsequent conveyance under the provisions of the R&PP Act, as amended (43 U.S.C. 869 *et seq.* ): Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada. T. 22 S., R. 61 E., Sec. 30, SE 1/4 SE 1/4 SE 1/4 . The area described contains 10 acres, more or less in Clark County. In accordance with the R&PP Act, Gurdwara Baba Deep Singh, Inc. filed an application for the above-described 10 acres of public land to be developed for a church and fellowship hall. The plan also includes a patio to be constructed behind the church for outdoor ceremonies and church functions. Additional detailed information pertaining to this application, plan of development, and site plan is in case file N-83051 located at the BLM Las Vegas Field Office, 4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive, Las Vegas, Nevada. The land is not needed for any Federal purpose. The lease/conveyance is consistent with the Las Vegas Resource Management Plan dated October 5, 1998, and would be in the public interest. The lease/conveyance, when issued, will be subject to the provisions of the R&PP Act and applicable regulations of the Secretary of the Interior, and will contain the following reservations to the United States: 1. A right-of-way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States, Act of August 30, 1890 (43 U.S.C. 945); and 2. All minerals together with the right to prospect for, mine and remove such deposits from the same under applicable law and such regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe. The lease/conveyance will be subject to: 1. Valid existing rights; 2. Right-of-way N-57053 for power line purposes granted to the Nevada Power Company, its successors or assigns, and for telephone line purposes granted to the Central Telephone Company, its successors or assigns, pursuant to the Act of October 21, 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1761); 3. Rights-of-way N-60432 and N-65521 for road purposes, and N-77260 for road and drainage purposes granted to Clark County, its successors or assigns, pursuant to the Act of October 21, 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1761); 4. Right-of-way N-76359 for water pipeline purposes granted to the Las Vegas Valley Water District, its successors or assigns, pursuant to the Act of October 21, 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1761); 5. Right-of-way N-78847 for gas pipeline purposes granted to the Southwest Gas Corporation, its successors or assigns, pursuant to the Act of February 25, 1920 (30 U.S.C. 185 Sec. 28). On December 13, 2007, the land described will be segregated from all other forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including the general mining laws, except for lease/conveyance under the R&PP Act, leasing under the mineral leasing laws, and disposal under the mineral material disposal laws. Interested parties may submit comments involving the suitability of the land for a church and fellowship hall. Comments on the classification are restricted to whether the land is physically suited for the proposal, whether the use will maximize the future use or uses of the land, whether the use is consistent with local planning and zoning, or if the use is consistent with State and Federal programs. Interested parties may submit comments regarding the specific use(s) proposed in the application and plan of development, whether the BLM followed proper administrative procedures in reaching the decision to lease/convey under the R&PP Act, or any other factor not directly related to the suitability of the land for R&PP use. Only written comments submitted by postal service or overnight mail to the Field Manager, BLM Las Vegas Field Office will be considered properly filed. Electronic mail, facsimiles, or telephone comments will not be considered properly filed. Comments, including names and addresses of respondents, will be available for public review. Before including your address, telephone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, be advised that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Any adverse comments will be reviewed by the BLM Nevada State Director. In the absence of any adverse comments, the classification of the land described in this notice will become effective February 11, 2008. The land will not be available for lease/conveyance until after the classification becomes effective. (Authority: 43 CFR part 2740) Dated: December 6, 2007. Mark R. Chatterton, Assistant Field Manager, Non-Renewable Resources, Las Vegas Field Office, NV. [FR Doc. E7-24147 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-HC-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Winter Use Plans, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks and the John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial Parkway, Wyoming AGENCY: National Park Service, Department of the Interior. ACTION: Notice of Availability of a Record of Decision on the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Winter Use Plans, Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks and the John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial Parkway. SUMMARY: Pursuant to § 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 83 Stat. 852, 853, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park Service announces the availability of the Record of Decision for the Winter Use Plans, Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks and the John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial Parkway, Wyoming. On November 20, 2007, the Director, Intermountain Region, approved the Record of Decision for the project. Beginning in the winter of 2007-2008, the National Park Service
(NPS)will begin to implement this Decision, although certain provisions will not apply until implementing regulations are promulgated, as described in the Revised Preferred Alternative (Alternative 7) contained in the FEIS issued on October 5, 2007. The following course of action will occur under Alternative 7 as modified in the ROD: 540 Best Available Technology
(BAT)snowmobiles and 83 snowcoaches will be allowed per day in Yellowstone. All snowmobiles and snowcoaches will be 100% commercially guided. For the winter season of 2007-2008 Sylvan Pass will be managed continuing the combined program outlined in the 2004 Temporary Plan. After the winter of 2007-2008, in order to maximize risk reduction, the pass would be open and managed using full avalanche forecasting (as defined in the Sylvan Pass Operational Risk Management Assessment). When full forecasting indicates the pass is safe, the pass will be open to oversnow travel (both motorized and non-motorized access). The NPS will, in good faith, work cooperatively with the State of Wyoming, Park County, Wyoming, and the City of Cody to determine how to provide continued snowmobile and snowcoach motorized oversnow access to Yellowstone National Park through the East Gate via Sylvan Pass in the winter use seasons beyond 2007-2008. Beginning with the 2011-2012 season, all snowcoaches operating in the parks will be required to meet BAT emission and sound level requirements. In Grand Teton and the Parkway, grooming and motorized oversnow travel on the Continental Divide Snowmobile Trail
(CDST)between Moran Junction and Flagg Ranch will be discontinued. However, those interested in through travel on the CDST may transport their snowmobiles on trailers between these locations. Twenty-five snowmobiles a day will be allowed to travel on the Grassy Lake Road with no BAT or guiding requirement. Forty unguided BAT snowmobiles a day will be allowed on Jackson Lake to facilitate ice fishing by those possessing appropriate fishing gear and a valid State of Wyoming fishing license. This course of action and seven alternatives were analyzed in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements. The full range of foreseeable environmental consequences was assessed, and appropriate mitigating measures were identified. The Record of Decision includes a statement of the decision made, synopses of other alternatives considered, the basis for the decision, a description of the environmentally preferred alternative, a finding on impairment of park resources and values, a listing of measures to minimize environmental harm, and an overview of public involvement in the decision-making process. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Sacklin, P.O. Box 168, Yellowstone National Park, WY 82190,
(307)344-2019, *yell_winter_use@nps.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of the Record of Decision may be obtained from the contact listed above or online at *http://parkplanning.nps.gov* . Dated: November 20, 2007. Michael D. Snyder, Regional Director, Intermountain Region, National Park Service. [FR Doc. E7-24165 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-CT-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701-TA-444-446 (Final) and 731-TA-1107-1109 (Final)] Coated Free Sheet Paper From China, Indonesia, and Korea Determinations On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigations, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) determines, pursuant to sections 705(b) and 735(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1671d(b) and 1673d(b)) (the Act), that an industry in the United States is not materially injured or threatened with material injury, and the establishment of an industry in the United States is not materially retarded, 2 by reason of imports from China, Indonesia, and Korea of coated free sheet paper, provided for in subheadings 4810.13.19, 4810.13.20, 4810.13.50, 4810.13.70, 4810.14.19, 4810.14.20, 4810.14.50, 4810.14.70, 4810.19.19, and 4810.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that have been found by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) to be subsidized by the Governments of China, Indonesia, and Korea and to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). 1 The record is defined in § 207.2(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). 2 Commissioner Charlotte R. Lane dissenting. Background The Commission instituted these investigations effective October 31, 2006, following receipt of a petition filed with the Commission and Commerce by NewPage Corp., Dayton, OH. The final phase of the investigations was scheduled by the Commission following notification of preliminary determinations by Commerce that imports of coated free sheet paper from China, Indonesia, and Korea were being subsidized within the meaning of section 703(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671b(b)) and were being sold at LTFV within the meaning of section 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)). Notice of the scheduling of the final phase of the Commission's investigations and of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the **Federal Register** of July 5, 2007 (72 FR 36719). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on October 18, 2007, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission transmitted its determinations in these investigations to the Secretary of Commerce on December 6, 2007. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 3965 (December 2007), entitled *Coated Free Sheet Paper from China, Indonesia, and Korea: Investigation Nos. 701-TA-444-446 (Final) and 731-TA-1107-1109 (Final)* . By order of the Commission. Issued: December 7, 2007. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E7-24103 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employee Benefits Security Administration RIN 1210-ZA13 Proposed Class Exemption for Plan Fiduciaries When Plan Service Arrangements Fail To Comply With ERISA Section 408(b)(2) AGENCY: Employee Benefits Security Administration. ACTION: Notice of proposed class exemption. SUMMARY: This document contains a notice of pendency before the Department of Labor (the Department) of a proposed class exemption from certain prohibited transaction restrictions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (the Act or ERISA). If granted, the proposed exemption would relieve a plan fiduciary from engaging in a transaction that constitutes a prohibited furnishing of services to an employee benefit plan. The exemption would apply to a plan fiduciary who enters into (or extends or renews) a written contract or arrangement for the provision of services to an employee benefit plan by a service provider to the plan when the resulting contract or arrangement between the plan and the service provider fails to constitute a “reasonable contract or arrangement” due to the service provider's failure to comply with its contractual obligation to disclose certain information as required by 29 CFR § 2550.408b-2(c)(1), as amended (“disclosure obligations”). The proposed exemption, if granted, would also affect participants and beneficiaries of employee benefit plans to the extent such plans enter into any contracts or arrangements for “necessary services” with entities that do not provide sufficient disclosures to the plan to enable the responsible plan fiduciary to determine that there is a “reasonable contract or arrangement” that complies with ERISA section 408(b)(2). DATES: Written comments must be received by the Department on or before February 11, 2008. ADDRESSES: To facilitate the receipt and processing of comment letters, the Employee Benefits Security Administration
(EBSA)encourages interested persons to submit their comments electronically by e-mail to *e-ORI@dol.gov* , or by using the Federal eRulemaking portal at *http://www.regulations.gov* (follow instructions for submission of comments). Persons submitting comments electronically should not submit paper copies. Persons interested in submitting paper copies should send or deliver their comments to the Office of Regulations and Interpretations, Employee Benefits Security Administration, Attn: Plan Fiduciary Class Exemption for Section 408(b)(2) Amendment, Room N-5655, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. All comments will be available to the public, without charge, online at *http://www.regulations.gov* or *http://www.dol.gov/ebsa* and at the Public Disclosure Room, N-1513, Employee Benefits Security Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fil Williams, Office of Regulations and Interpretations, Employee Benefits Security Administration,
(202)693-8510. This is not a toll-free number. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document contains a notice of pendency before the Department of a proposed class exemption from the restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(C) of the Act. The Department is proposing the class exemption on its own motion pursuant to section 408(a) of the Act, and in accordance with the procedures set forth in 29 CFR part 2570, subpart B (55 FR 32836, August 10, 1990). I. Executive Order 12866 Under Executive Order 12866, the U.S. Department of Labor (the Department) must determine whether a regulatory action is “significant” and therefore subject to the requirements of the Executive Order and subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Under section 3(f) of the Executive Order, a “significant regulatory action” is an action that likely will result in a rule:
(1)Having an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely and materially affecting a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities (also referred to as “economically significant”);
(2)creating serious inconsistency or otherwise interfering with an action taken or planned by another agency;
(3)materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4)raising novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. It has been determined that the proposed exemption is significant under section 3(f)(1) of the executive order because it likely will materially affect a sector of the economy. Accordingly, the proposed exemption has been reviewed by OMB. As explained in the preamble above, the proposed exemption will only be used in connection with the proposed regulation published in this same **Federal Register** entitled “Reasonable Contract or Arrangement Under Section 408(b)(2)—Fee Disclosure.” The Department conducted a Regulatory Impact Analysis
(RIA)for the proposed regulation, published elsewhere in this issue of the **Federal Register** . The RIA discusses the costs and benefits of the proposed regulation and quantifies the costs to service providers. In considering costs to plans, the Department determined that, because fiduciaries already have a duty to evaluate the reasonableness of contracts and arrangements with service providers, the proposed regulation generally reduces the time and effort fiduciaries need to spend to obtain the necessary information. The Department acknowledges that some plans may incur increased costs from the proposed regulation if they need to review unnecessary or increasingly detailed disclosure information. The Department concluded that any additional effort on the part of fiduciaries due to the proposed regulation would be offset by the reduced effort fiduciaries would need to spend to obtain the required information from service providers. The Department thus did not attempt to quantify these additional costs. The proposed class exemption could result in additional costs to plans due to the requirement that fiduciaries must notify the service provider and possibly the Department upon discovering an inadequate disclosure. The Department determined that these additional costs, which likely would accrue to only a small percentage of plan fiduciaries, were still within the range of what would be reasonably offset by the reduced costs for plans under the proposed regulation. The Department therefore did not attempt to quantify the costs of the proposed exemption for plan fiduciaries. II. Paperwork Reduction Act As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, the Department of Labor conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA 95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps to ensure that the public understands the Department's collection instructions, respondents can provide the requested data in the desired format, the reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, and the Department can properly assess the impact of collection requirements on respondents. The proposed exemption, if granted, will be used only by plan fiduciaries that have unknowingly entered into a contract or arrangement which is not reasonable according to the requirements of the proposed regulation (published elsewhere in this issue of the **Federal Register** ). The Department has combined the paperwork burdens for the proposed regulation and the proposed class exemption under one Information Collection Request (ICR). By combining the two collections of information, the Department believes that the general public will gain a better understanding of the burden impact as it relates to different kinds of respondents. The specific burden for the proposed exemption includes labor and materials costs of fiduciaries' written requests to service providers and notifications to the Department. The hour and cost burdens for the ICR are described more fully in the preamble to the proposed regulation, “Reasonable Contract or Arrangement Under Section 408(b)(2)—Fee Disclosure,” under the section on the Paperwork Reduction Act. III. Background The Department has published in today's **Federal Register** a proposal to amend its regulations under ERISA section 408(b)(2). Specifically, the Department is proposing to amend its regulations at 29 CFR § 2550.408b-2(c) to provide that any contract or arrangement for services to an employee benefit plan by certain service providers, in order to be considered a “reasonable contract or arrangement” in compliance with such regulations, must require specific written disclosures regarding the service provider's compensation, fees and conflicts of interest that might affect its performance of services. The service providers affected by the proposed regulation, as discussed therein, include those who:
(i)Provide or may provide services to an employee benefit plan pursuant to a written contract or arrangement as a fiduciary, within the meaning of section 3(21) of ERISA or under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940;
(ii)provide or may provide any one or more of the following services to the plan pursuant to the contract or arrangement: Banking, consulting, custodial, insurance, investment advisory (plan or participants), investment management, recordkeeping, securities or other investment brokerage, or third-party administration; or
(iii)receive or may receive indirect compensation or fees, as described in proposed § 2550.408b-2(c)(1)(iii)(A)( *1* ), in connection with the following services to the plan: Accounting, actuarial, appraisal, auditing, legal, or valuation. As noted in the preamble to the proposed regulation, as published in today's **Federal Register** , when selecting service providers, a fiduciary must have enough information to make informed decisions about the services to be provided, the costs of those services, and potential conflicts of interest. The proposed regulation requires that a “reasonable contract or arrangement” for certain services under section 408(b)(2) must be in writing and that the terms of the contract or arrangement must require the service provider to disclose specific information. The regulation further requires that the service provider furnish the appropriate plan fiduciary with the specified information in accordance with the terms of the contract or arrangement. As also discussed in the preamble to the proposed regulation, a failure to satisfy the conditions of the regulation will, among other things, cause the responsible plan fiduciary to violate the prohibited transaction provisions of ERISA section 406(a)(1)(C) because the transaction would not satisfy the statutory exemption under section 408(b)(2) of ERISA. A failure to comply with the regulation would also result in a prohibited transaction under section 4975(c)(1)(C) of the Internal Revenue Code (the Code) because the transaction would not satisfy the Code's parallel statutory exemption for services at 26 U.S.C. § 4975(d)(2). A prohibited transaction under section 4975 of the Code subjects the service provider as a “disqualified person” to excise taxes as described in section 4975(a) and
(b)of the Code. The Department recognizes that there may be circumstances when a plan fiduciary enters into a contract or arrangement that appears to meet the requirements of the regulation for relief under ERISA section 408(b)(2), but unbeknownst to the plan fiduciary, the service provider fails to disclose information consistent with the terms of the regulation and the contract or arrangement. In the absence of an exemption providing otherwise, the service provider's failure to comply will result in a prohibited transaction by both the service provider and the plan fiduciary. In an effort to address this situation, the Department proposes to adopt a class exemption that would relieve the plan fiduciary from liability for a prohibited transaction resulting from the service provider's failure to comply with the regulation. A description of the proposed class exemption follows. IV. Description of the Proposed Class Exemption The proposed exemption consists of three parts. Section I sets forth the general exemption and describes the transactions covered. Section II contains specific conditions applicable to transactions described in section I and requires the plan fiduciary to notify the Department under certain circumstances of the service provider's failure to comply with their disclosure obligations. Section III sets forth the timing, content and other requirements applicable to the notice required to be filed with the Department by the responsible plan fiduciary pursuant to section II. 1 1 As with any exemption from ERISA's prohibited transaction provisions, the party seeking to avail itself of the relief provided by the exemption has the burden of demonstrating compliance with the conditions of the exemption. The exemption set forth in section I would, upon adoption, provide relief from the restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(C) of ERISA to a plan fiduciary with authority to cause the plan to enter into, extend or renew a written contract or arrangement for the provision of necessary services (“the responsible plan fiduciary”), notwithstanding the service provider's initial or subsequent failure to comply with its disclosure obligations, provided that the conditions set forth in section II are met. As noted below, once the responsible plan fiduciary discovers that the service provider failed to meet its disclosure obligations, the fiduciary must, as a condition for relief under the exemption, take steps to address the failure. Section II.A. of the proposed exemption requires that the responsible plan fiduciary, taking into account all of the information available at the time the contract or arrangement was entered into, extended or renewed, reasonably believed that the contract or arrangement met the requirements of 29 CFR § 2550.408b-2(c)(1). In addition, at the time referred to above, the responsible plan fiduciary must not know, or have reason to know, that the service provider failed, or would fail, to comply with its disclosure obligations. This condition reinforces the principle that the plan fiduciary must have entered into the contract or arrangement with a reasonable belief that the contract or arrangement met the requirements for a reasonable contract or arrangement under § 2550.408b-2(c)(1) and without knowing of the service provider's disclosure failures. Section II.B.1 of the proposal requires that, upon discovery that the service provider failed to comply with its disclosure obligations, the responsible fiduciary shall, if it has not already received the information that the service provider failed to disclose under its disclosure obligations, request in writing that the service provider furnish the information. If the service provider fails to comply with the plan fiduciary's written request within 90 days, section II.B.2 provides that the plan fiduciary shall notify the Department. The Department believes that this condition will increase the likelihood that service providers will furnish plan fiduciaries the information they need to make informed decisions about the contract or arrangement with the service provider. 2 2 The notice requirement will not relieve a plan administrator of the obligation to report a prohibited transaction in accordance with the instructions to the Annual Report Form 5500 Series, without regard to whether the service provider furnishes information in response to the fiduciary's request. Section II.C. of the proposal further provides that, after the responsible plan fiduciary discovers that the service provider failed to comply with its disclosure obligations, the fiduciary shall determine whether to terminate or continue the contract or arrangement. In this regard, it is expected that responsible plan fiduciaries would evaluate the nature of the particular disclosure failure and determine the extent of the actions necessary under the facts and circumstances. Such fiduciary should consider, among other factors, the availability, qualifications and costs of potential replacement service providers, and the responsiveness of the service provider in furnishing the missing information. Section II.C., however, does not abrogate or supersede the duties imposed upon the fiduciary by section 404(a) of ERISA, which also require the fiduciary to consider what steps to take in response to the service provider's nondisclosure. Section III of the proposal sets forth the timing, content and other requirements applicable to notifying the Department of a service provider's failure to meet its disclosure obligations. Specifically, section III.B. provides that the responsible plan fiduciary shall file a notice with the Department not later than 30 days following the earlier of:
(i)The service provider's refusal to furnish the requested information; or
(ii)the date which is 90 days after the date the written request referred to in Section II.B.1 is made. In this context, a service provider's refusal to provide information to the responsible plan fiduciary, following such fiduciary's written request, shall constitute a service provider's failure to meet its disclosure obligations prior to the end of the 90-day period. The notice to the Department must contain the following information:
(i)The name of the plan;
(ii)the three digit plan number used for the plan's Annual Report;
(iii)the plan sponsor's name, address, and EIN;
(iv)the name, address and telephone number of the responsible plan fiduciary;
(v)the name, address, phone number, and, if known, EIN of the service provider;
(vi)a description of the services provided to the plan;
(vii)a description of the information that the service provider failed to furnish;
(viii)the date on which such information was requested in writing from the service provider; and
(ix)a statement as to whether the service provider continues to provide services to the plan. This notice should be sent to the U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration, Office of Enforcement, 200 Constitution Ave., NW., Suite 600, Washington, DC 20210. Such notices may also be sent electronically to: *OE-DelinquentSPnotice@dol.gov* . The Department will provide specific information for the written or electronic submission of the required notice as part of the final exemption. The Department also anticipates development of a model notice by the Department that will facilitate compliance with the notification requirement. V. Effective Date The Department is proposing an effective date for the proposed class exemption which is 90 days after the publication of the final exemption in the **Federal Register** . This date corresponds with the effective date for the proposed amendments to the Department's regulations at 29 CFR 2550.408b-2(c). General Information The attention of interested persons is directed to the following:
(1)The fact that a transaction is the subject of an exemption under section 408(a) of the Act does not relieve a fiduciary or other party in interest or disqualified person from other provisions of the Act, including any prohibited transaction provisions to which the exemption does not apply and the general fiduciary responsibility provisions of section 404 of the Act. Section 404 requires, among other things, that a fiduciary discharge its duties with respect to the plan prudently and solely in the interests of the plan's participants and beneficiaries. A transaction's qualification for an exemption also does not affect the requirement of section 401(a) of the Code that the plan must operate for the exclusive benefit of the employees of the employer maintaining the plan and their beneficiaries;
(2)Before an exemption may be granted under section 408(a) of the Act, the Department must find that the exemption is administratively feasible, in the interests of the plans and their participants and beneficiaries and protective of the rights of participants and beneficiaries of such plans;
(3)If granted, the proposed exemption will apply to a transaction only if the conditions specified in the exemption are met; and
(4)The proposed exemption, if granted, will be supplemental to, and not in derogation of, any other provisions of the Act, including statutory or administrative exemptions and transitional rules. Proposed Exemption The Department has under consideration the grant of the following class exemption under the authority of section 408(a) of the Act and in accordance with the procedures set forth in 29 CFR part 2570, subpart B (55 Fed Reg. 32836, 32847, August 10, 1990). Section I—Exemption for the Plan Fiduciary Entering Certain Contracts or Arrangements With a Service Provider Effective [90 days after publication of the final exemption in the **Federal Register** ], the restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(C) of the Act shall not apply to a plan fiduciary who uses its authority to cause an employee benefit plan to enter into (extend or renew) a written contract or arrangement for the provision of services (“the responsible plan fiduciary”), notwithstanding the service provider's initial or subsequent failure to comply with its contractual obligation to disclose certain information as required by 29 CFR 2550.408b-2(c)(1) (“disclosure obligations”), provided that the conditions set forth in section II below are met. Section II—Conditions A. The responsible plan fiduciary, taking into account all of the information available at the time the contract or arrangement was entered into, extended or renewed, reasonably believed that the contract or arrangement met the requirements of 29 CFR § 2550.408b-2(c)(1) and did not know, or have reason to know, that the service provider failed or would fail to comply with its disclosure obligations; B.1. The responsible plan fiduciary, upon discovering that the service provider failed to comply with its disclosure obligations, shall, if it has not already received the information that the service provider failed to disclose under its disclosure obligations, request in writing that the service provider furnish the information; 2. If the service provider fails to comply with the plan fiduciary's written request within 90 days of the date of that request, the responsible plan fiduciary shall, in accordance with Section III, notify the Department of Labor of the service provider's failure; and C. The responsible plan fiduciary, following discovery that the service provider failed to comply with its disclosure obligations, shall determine whether to terminate or continue the contract or arrangement. The responsible plan fiduciary will evaluate the nature of the particular disclosure failure and determine the actions necessary under the facts and circumstances. Such fiduciary shall consider, among other factors, the availability, qualifications and costs of potential replacement service providers, and the responsiveness of the service provider in furnishing the information that the service provider should have disclosed, but did not, under its disclosure obligations. Section III—Notice Requirements A. The notice required by Section II.B.2 shall contain the following information:
(i)The name of the plan;
(ii)the three digit plan number used for the plan's Annual Report;
(iii)the plan sponsor's name, address, and EIN;
(iv)the name, address, and telephone number of the responsible fiduciary;
(v)the name, address, phone number, and, if known, EIN of the service provider;
(vi)a description of the services provided to the plan;
(vii)a description of the information that the service provider failed to furnish;
(viii)the date on which such information was requested in writing from the service provider; and
(ix)a statement as to whether the service provider continues to provide services to the plan; B. The notice required by Section II.B.2 shall be filed with the Department not later than 30 days following the earlier of:
(i)The service provider's refusal to furnish the requested information; or
(ii)the date which is 90 days after the date the written request referred to in Section II.B.1 is made; and C. The notice required by Section II.B.2 shall be sent to the following address: U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration, Office of Enforcement, 200 Constitution Ave., NW., Suite 600, Washington, DC 20210; or may be sent electronically to *OE-DelinquentSPnotice@dol.gov* . Signed at Washington, DC, this 7th day of December, 2007. Bradford P. Campbell, Assistant Secretary, Employee Benefits Security Administration, Department of Labor. [FR Doc. E7-24063 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-29-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment and Training The Advisory Committee on Veterans' Employment, Training and Employer Outreach (ACVETEO); Notice of Open Meeting The Advisory Committee on Veterans' Employment, Training and Employer Outreach (ACVETEO) was established pursuant to Title II of the Veterans' Housing Opportunity and Benefits Improvement Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-233) and Section 9 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA)(P.L. 92-462, Title 5 U.S.C. app.II). The ACVETEO's authority is codified in Title 38 U.S. Code, Section 4110. The ACVETEO is responsible for assessing employment and training needs of veterans; determining the extent to which the programs and activities of the Department of Labor meets these needs; and assisting in carrying out outreach to employers seeking to hire veterans. The Advisory Committee on Veterans' Employment, Training and Employer Outreach will meet on Monday, February 11th from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. and on Tuesday, February 12th from 8 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. at the Doubletree Hotel, 3203 Quebec Street, Denver, Colorado 80207. The committee will discuss programs assisting veterans seeking employment with special emphasis on transition assistance programs
(TAP)and raising employer awareness as to the advantages of hiring veterans. Individuals needing special accommodations should notify Bill Offutt at
(202)693-4717 by February 2, 2008. Signed in Washington, DC, this 6th day of December 2007. John M. McWilliam, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Veterans Employment and Training. [FR Doc. E7-24157 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-79-P NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [Notice (07-093)] Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive License AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. ACTION: Notice of intent to grant exclusive license. SUMMARY: This notice is issued in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and 37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i). NASA hereby gives notice of its intent to grant an exclusive license in the United States to practice the invention described and claimed in U.S. Patent No. 6,667,725, Radio Frequency Telemetry System for Sensors and Actuators, and U.S. Patent No. 7,191,013, Hand Held Device for Wireless Powering and Interrogation of BioMEMS Sensors and Actuators to Endotronix having its principal place of business in Peoria, Illinois. The patent rights in these inventions have been assigned to the United States of America as represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The prospective exclusive license will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. DATES: The exclusive license may be granted unless, within fifteen
(15)days from the date of this published notice, NASA receives written objections including evidence and argument that establish that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. Competing applications completed and received by NASA within fifteen
(15)days of the date of this published notice will also be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated exclusive license. Objections submitted in response to this notice will not be made available to the public for inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552. ADDRESSES: Objections relating to the prospective license may be submitted to Patent Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, NASA Glenn Research Center, MS 21-14, 21000 Brookpark Rd., Cleveland, OH 44135, telephone
(216)433-5754, facsimile
(216)433-6790. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kaprice Harris, Intellectual Property Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, NASA Glenn Research Center, MS 21-14, 21000 Brookpark Rd., Cleveland, OH 44135, telephone
(216)433-5754, facsimile
(216)433-6790. Information about other NASA inventions available for licensing can be found online at *http://technology.nasa.gov/.* December 3, 2007. Keith T. Sefton, Deputy General Counsel, Administration and Management. [FR Doc. E7-24116 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [Notice (07-095)] Notice of Intent To Grant Partially Exclusive License AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. ACTION: Notice of Intent To Grant Partially Exclusive License. SUMMARY: This notice is issued in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and 37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i). NASA hereby gives notice of its intent to grant a partially exclusive license in the United States to practice the invention described and claimed in U.S. Patent Application Serial No.10/385,168 entitled Phase/Matrix Transformation Weld Process and Apparatus and NASA Case No. MFS-31559-1-DIV to Keystone Synergistic Enterprises, Inc. having its principal place of business in Port St. Lucie, Florida. The patent rights in this invention have been assigned to the United States of America as represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The prospective partially exclusive license will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. DATES: The prospective partially exclusive license may be granted unless, within fifteen
(15)days from the date of this published notice, NASA receives written objections including evidence and argument that establish that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. Competing applications completed and received by NASA within fifteen
(15)days of the date of this published notice will also be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated partially exclusive license. Objections submitted in response to this notice will not be made available to the public for inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552. ADDRESSES: Objections relating to the prospective license may be submitted to Mr. James J. McGroary, Chief Patent Counsel/LS01, Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL 35812,
(256)544-0013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sammy A. Nabors, Technology Transfer Program Office/ED03, Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL 35812,
(256)544-5226. Information about other NASA inventions available for licensing can be found online at *http://techtracs.nasa.gov/* . Dated: December 3, 2007. Keith T. Sefton, Deputy General Counsel, Administration and Management. [FR Doc. E7-24115 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [Notice (07-094)] Notice of Intent To Grant a Partially Exclusive License AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. ACTION: Notice of Intent To Grant a Partially Exclusive License. SUMMARY: This notice is issued in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and 37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i). NASA hereby gives notice of its intent to grant a partially exclusive license in the United States to practice the invention described and claimed in U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 11/543,284 entitled Fiber Optic Liquid Mass Flow Sensor and Method and NASA Case No. MFS-32031-1 to Kratos Defense and Security Solutions having its principal place of business in San Diego, California. The patent rights in this invention have been assigned to the United States of America as represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The prospective partially exclusive license will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. DATES: The prospective partially exclusive license may be granted unless, within fifteen
(15)days from the date of this published notice, NASA receives written objections including evidence and argument that establish that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. Competing applications completed and received by NASA within fifteen
(15)days of the date of this published notice will also be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated partially exclusive license. Objections submitted in response to this notice will not be made available to the public for inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552. ADDRESSES: Objections relating to the prospective license may be submitted to Mr. James J. McGroary, Chief Patent Counsel/LS01, Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL 35812,
(256)544-0013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sammy A. Nabors, Technology Transfer Program Office/ED03, Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL 35812,
(256)544-5226. Information about other NASA inventions available for licensing can be found online at *http://techtracs.nasa.gov/* . Dated: December 3, 2007. Keith T. Sefton, Deputy General Counsel, Administration and Management. [FR Doc. E7-24111 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION National Science Board ad hoc Committee for the Vannevar Bush Award; Sunshine Act Meetings; Notice The National Science Board's *ad hoc* Committee for the Vannevar Bush Award, pursuant to NSF regulations (45 CFR Part 614), the National Science Foundation Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1862n-5), and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice in regard to the scheduling of meetings for the transaction of National Science Board business and other matters specified, as follows: *Date and Time:* Friday, December 21, 2007 at 2 p.m. *Subject Matter:* Discussion of candidates for the 2008 Vannevar Bush Award. *Status:* Closed. This meeting will be held by teleconference originating at the National Science Board Office, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. Please refer to the National Science Board Web site ( *http://www.nsf.gov/nsb* ) for information or schedule updates, or contact: Jennifer Richards, National Science Board Office, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone:
(703)292-7000. Russell Moy, Attorney-Advisor. [FR Doc. E7-24220 Filed 12-12-07; 10:14 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to submit an information collection request to OMB and solicitation of public comment. SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a submittal to OMB for review of continued approval of information collections under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). *Information pertaining to the requirement to be submitted:* 1. *The title of the information collection:* NUREG/BR-0238, Materials Annual Fee Billing Handbook. NRC Form 628, “Financial EDI Authorization”. NUREG/BR-0254, Payment Methods. NRC Form 629, “Authorization for Payment by Credit Card”. 2. *Current OMB approval number:* 3150-0190. 3. *How often the collection is required:* Annually. 4. *Who is required or asked to report:* Anyone doing business with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission including licensees, applicants and individuals who are required to pay a fee for inspections and licenses. 5. *The number of annual respondents:* 466 (10 for NRC Form 628 and 456 for NRC Form 629 and NUREG/BR-0254). 6. *The number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request:* 38 (.8 hour for NRC Form 628 and 37 hours for NRC Form 629 and NUREG/BR-0254). 7. *Abstract:* The U.S. Department of the Treasury encourages the public to pay monies owed the government through use of the Automated Clearinghouse Network and credit cards. These two methods of payment are used by licensees, applicants, and individuals to pay civil penalties, full cost licensing fees, and inspection fees to the NRC. The NRC Form 628, “Financial EDI Authorization,” provides an option to make electronic payment through the Automated Clearinghouse
(ACH)Network and authorizes the licensee's bank to pay invoices to the NRC through the ACH. The NRC Form 628 requests the licensee's name, electronic funds transfer contact, telephone number, address, authorized signature and title. NRC Form 629, “Authorization for Payment by Credit Card,” is another option used to authorize payment. The credit card authorization form is used by licensees to authorize payment by credit card for license fees and for payment of fees for fingerprint cards, and solicits information that identifies the cardholder's name, address, account number, card expiration date, cards accepted, cardholder's signature, invoice number or license number. There are no record keeping requirements associated with this collection. Submit, by February 11, 2008, comments that address the following questions: 1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the information have practical utility? 2. Is the burden estimate accurate? 3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected? 4. How can the burden of the information collection be minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology? A copy of the draft supporting statement may be viewed free of charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC worldwide Web site: *http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html* . The document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days after the signature date of this notice. Comments and questions about the information collection requirements may be directed to the NRC Clearance Officer, Margaret A. Janney (T-5 F52), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by telephone at 301-415-7245, or by Internet electronic mail to *INFOCOLLECTS@NRC.GOV* . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of December 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Margaret A. Janney, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information Services. [FR Doc. E7-24168 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No.: 70-27] BWX Technologies, Inc., Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Related to Proposed Issuance of an Exemption From 10 CFR 70.24 Requirements AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Environmental assessment
(EA)and finding of no significant impact (FONSI). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy M. Snyder, Fuel Manufacturing Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop EBB-2C40M, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone
(301)492-3225 and e-mail *ams3@nrc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction Under U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC)license SNM-42 and the provisions of 10 CFR Part 70, Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material, BWX Technologies, Inc. (BWXT or the licensee) is authorized to receive and possess special nuclear material for the research, fabrication and assembly of nuclear fuel and related components at its facility, located in Lynchburg, Virginia. Under this license, BWXT is also allowed to receive, acquire, and transfer irradiated fuel (spent nuclear fuel) at its facility. The NRC staff is considering the issuance of an exemption to requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 70.24, under a certain condition, for the spent nuclear fuel storage areas at the BWXT site. If the NRC decides to grant the exemption, then the license will be amended to incorporate a license condition to reflect the exemption. These actions would then allow BWXT to implement its proposed method to meet the January 16, 2007, NRC Order (EA-07-011) requiring BWXT to implement additional security measures at the BWXT site. The licensee found that if these measures are taken, it would not be in full compliance with the criticality monitoring requirements of 10 CFR 70.24. Granting this exemption would also allow BWXT to continue to store, in a safe configuration, spent nuclear fuel. The NRC has prepared an EA in support of granting an exemption and amending the license. Based on this EA, the NRC has concluded that a FONSI is appropriate and, therefore, an environmental impact statement
(EIS)is not warranted. The NRC is also conducting a safety review of the BWXT request for exemption. The results of the safety review will be documented in a separate Safety Evaluation Report. II. Environmental Assessment Background By letter, dated May 2, 2007, BWXT submitted its exemption request. On May 14, 2007, BWXT submitted, via email, a clarification that stated its current Environmental Report (ER), dated March 10, 2004, addresses the areas where spent nuclear fuel, previously used for research, is stored at the site. The documents that were evaluated in preparing this EA included the NRC's EA for Renewal of License SNM-42, dated August 2005, the current BWXT ER for Renewal of License SNM-42, dated March 10, 2004, and the e-mail from BWXT (Leah Morrell, May 14, 2007) stating, with respect to this exemption request, that the BWXT's ER, dated March 10, 2004, is the current ER. Review Scope The purpose of this EA is to assess the environmental impacts of the proposed exemption and associated license amendment. It does not approve the request. This EA is limited to the proposed exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24 in spent nuclear fuel storage areas, and any cumulative impacts on existing plant operations. The existing conditions and operations at the BWXT facility were evaluated, by the NRC, for environmental impacts in an EA for the renewal of the BWXT license. This assessment presents the information and analysis of the proposed actions for determining whether issuance of a FONSI is appropriate. Need for the Proposed Action As a result of the events of September 11, 2001, the NRC has required heightened security measures for facilities that are authorized to possess special nuclear material. BWXT is one such facility. Following an evaluation, by BWXT, of ways to meet these required security measures, BWXT concluded that the best method to meet those measures would affect the current criticality monitoring system. Specifically, the implementation of BWXT's proposed method to implement the NRC Security Order (EA-07-011) would make the detection of a criticality challenging for the criticality monitoring systems located in each spent nuclear fuel storage area when the additional security measures imposed by EA-07-011 are in place. The additional security measures are not currently in place. The Proposed Actions The proposed actions are:
(1)The NRC granting an exemption to the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24 in the spent fuel storage areas during the period of time the licensee does not need to access the spent nuclear fuel; and
(2)the NRC issuing an amendment to the license reflecting such an exemption. These actions would allow BWXT to continue to safely store spent nuclear fuel in storage systems. This exemption would not apply during the short and very infrequent periods during which access to the stored material is required, or if BWXT no longer has spent nuclear fuel at its licensed site. The proposed actions are in accordance with the licensee's application dated May 2. 2007. Alternative to the Proposed Actions The actions available to the NRC are: 1. Approve the exemption and associated license amendment as described; or 2. No action (i.e., deny the request and do not amend the license,—the no-action alternative.) Affected Environment The affected environment for the proposed action and the alternative is the BWXT site. The affected environment is identical to the affected environment assessed in the EA, dated August 2005. A full description of the site and its characteristics is given in the NRC's 2005 EA. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative The NRC staff has completed its evaluation of the environmental impacts of the proposed action and concludes granting the licensee an exemption to the criticality monitoring requirements of 10 CFR 70.24 for the spent nuclear fuel storage system during periods when access to the spent nuclear fuel is not required; and would not increase the probability or consequences of accidents previously analyzed and would not affect facility radiation levels or facility radiological effluents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released off-site. There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent released off-site. There is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites because no previously undisturbed area will be affected by the proposed actions. The proposed action does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other effect on the environment. Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action and, thus, concludes that the proposed action will not have any significant impact to the human environment. The proposed action does not alter the previous National Environmental Protection Act findings made in approving the license renewal. Environmental Impacts of the Alternative to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the no-action alternative). Denial of the exemption request would result in:
(1)No associated license amendment: and
(2)no change to current environmental impacts, as the denial would result in the criticality monitoring requirements of 10 CFR 70.24 continuing to be fully applicable. Thus, the environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are identical because the present or absence of a criticality monitor and alarm for the spent nuclear fuel that is safety stored has no impact on the environment. Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with NUREG 1748, “Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing Actions Associated with NMSS Programs,” the NRC staff consulted with other agencies regarding the proposed actions. These consultations were intended to provide other agencies an opportunity to comment on the proposed actions, and to ensure that the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act were met with respect to the proposed actions. Commonwealth of Virginia The staff, on October 10, 2007, consulted with the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
(VDEQ)and the Virginia Department of Health (VDH). The VDEQ reviewed the draft and agreed with NRC's conclusion that no significant environmental impacts would result from this proposed action, if implemented. The VDH had technical questions regarding the criticality monitoring systems. Fish and Wildlife The staff has determined that consultation for Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act is not required because the proposed action does not involve construction or any other change in physical environment, therefore, will not affect listed species or critical habitat. Virginia Department of Historic Resources The staff has determined that the proposed action does not have the potential to effect on historic properties because it does not involve construction or any other change in physical environment. Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Conclusion On the basis of the EA, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment and that preparation of an EIS is not warranted. III. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of this assessment, the Commission has concluded that environmental impacts that are associated with the proposed action would not be significant and the Commission is making a finding of no significant impact. Preparers J. Wiebe, Project Manager, All Sections. A. Snyder, Project Manager, Sections 1.0, 4.0 and 5.0. List of References 1. BWXT. Request for Exemption from 10 CFR 70.24, Letter (May 2, 2007) to Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Lynchburg, Virginia: BWXT, Nuclear Products Division (confidential). 2. NRC. NUREG 1748, Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing Actions Associated with NMSS Programs—Final Report. (August 2003) Washington, DC: NRC (ML032450279). 3. BWXT. Environmental Report for Renewal of License SNM-42, March 10, 2004 (nonpublic). 4. BWXT. E-mail to NRC, Criticality Exemption, dated May 14, 2007 (ML073180015). 5. NRC. Environmental Assessment Related to the Renewal of License No. SNM-42. Docket 70-027 (August 2005) Washington, DC: NRC. (ML071300450). 6. NRC. E-mail to VDEQ, Pre-decisional EA, dated October 9, 2007, (ML073180022). 7. NRC. E-mail to VDH, Pre-decisional EA, dated October 10, 2007, (ML073180034). 8. VDH. Letter to NRC, Response to Pre-decisional EA, dated October 24, 2007 (ML73180017). 9. NRC. E-mail to VDH, Additional Comments on Pre-decisional EA, dated October 31, 2007 (ML073180027). 10. VDH. E-mail to NRC, Response to Additional Comments on Pre-decisional EA, dated October 31, 2007 (ML073180029). 11. VEQ. Letter to NRC, Response to Pre-decisional EA, dated October 17, 2007 (ML073230756). Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 30th day of November, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Peter J. Habighorst, Chief, Fuel Manufacturing Branch, Fuel Facility Licensing Directorate Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. E7-24200 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-184] National Institute of Standards and Technology; National Bureau of Standards Reactor; Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of NBSR Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, Commission) has published a final Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS)for License Renewal of the operating license TR-5 for an additional 20 years of operation for the National Bureau of Standards Reactor
(NBSR)located on the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST)campus in upper Montgomery County, Maryland. Possible alternatives to the proposed action (license renewal) include no action, constructing a new reactor to replace the NBSR capabilities, and using alternative research facilities. The final EIS is publicly available at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, or from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room is accessible at *http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.html* . The Accession Number for the final EIS is ML072970861. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC's PDR reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail at *pdr@nrc.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Dennis Beissel, Environmental Review Branch, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop O-11F1, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Mr. Beissel may be contacted at the aforementioned telephone number or e-mail address. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6 th day of December, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Eric Benner, Branch Chief, Environmental Review Branch, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E7-24172 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457, Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, and Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455, Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2] Exelon Generation Comany, LLC; Biweekly Notice; Application for Amendment to the Facility Operating License Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations; Correction AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of amendment issuance; correction. SUMMARY: This document corrects a notice appearing in the **Federal Register** on November 20, 2007 (72 FR 65375), that incorrectly identified the amendment numbers for Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, and Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2. This action is necessary to correct the erroneous amendment numbers. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Gratton, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone
(301)415-1055, e-mail: *CXG1@nrc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On page 65375, in the second column, in the second from the last complete paragraph, first line, the Notice is corrected to read from “Amendment Nos.: 150, 150, 145, 145,” to “Amendment Nos.: 151, 151, 146, 146.” Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of December 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Christopher Gratton, Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing. [FR Doc. E7-24179 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [EA-07-305] In the Matter of: Licensees Authorized To Possess Radioactive Material Quantities of Concern; Order Imposing Fingerprinting and Criminal History Records Check Requirements for Unescorted Access To Certain Radioactive Material (Effective Immediately) I The Licensees identified in Attachment 1 1 to this Order hold licenses issued in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act
(AEA)of 1954, as amended, by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission), authorizing them to possess items containing radioactive materials in quantities of concern. These materials and the quantities of concern are identified in Attachment 2 to this Order. Section 652 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), which became law on August 8, 2005, amended Section 149 of the AEA to require fingerprinting and a Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI)identification and criminal history records check for “any individual who is permitted unescorted access to radioactive materials or other property subject to regulation by the Commission that the Commission determines to be of such significance to the public health and safety or the common defense and security as to warrant fingerprinting and background checks.” Section 149 of the AEA also requires that “all fingerprints obtained by a licensee or applicant * * *shall be submitted to the Attorney General of the United States through the Commission for identification and a criminal history records check.” NRC has decided to implement this requirement, prior to the completion of a future rulemaking, which will implement these provisions of the EPAct, because a deliberate malevolent act by an individual with unescorted access to these radioactive materials has the potential to result in significant adverse impacts to the public health and safety. Individuals or classes of individual listed in 10 CFR 73.61 (72 FR 4945 (February 2, 2007)) are relieved from the fingerprinting and FBI identification and criminal history records check requirements of section 149. Individuals listed in Attachment 3, Paragraph 3 have already satisfied the requirements of section 149 of the AEA and therefore do not need to take additional action. Therefore, as set forth in this Order and in accordance with section 149 of the AEA, as amended by the EPAct, the Commission is imposing additional requirements for unescorted access to certain radioactive material. 1 Attachment 1 contains sensitive information and will not be released to the public. II Subsequent to the terrorist events of September 11, 2001, the NRC issued the Increased Controls
(IC)Orders (EA-05-090) 2 to certain Licensees (IC Licensees, Licensees) who are authorized to possess radioactive material in quantities of concern. These Orders increased the Licensees' control over their sources in order to prevent unintended radiation exposure and malicious acts. One specific requirement imposed by the IC Orders required Licensees to conduct background checks to determine the trustworthiness and reliability of individuals needing unescorted access to radioactive materials. “Access” to these radioactive materials means that an individual could exercise some physical control over the material or devices containing the material. Prior to the enactment of the EPAct, the NRC did not have the authority, except in the case of power reactor Licensees, to require Licensees to submit fingerprints for FBI identification and criminal history records checks of individuals being considered for unescorted access to radioactive materials subject to NRC regulations. The Commission has determined that radioactive materials possessed by IC Licensees are considered of such significance to the public health and safety as to warrant fingerprinting and FBI identification and criminal history records checks for such persons. Therefore, in accordance with section 149 of the AEA, as amended by the EPAct, the Commission is imposing the fingerprinting and FBI identification and criminal history records check requirements, as set forth in this Order, including those requirements identified in Attachment 3 to this Order on all IC Licensees identified in Attachment 1 to this Order, which are currently authorized to possess radioactive materials in quantities of concern. These requirements will remain in effect until the Commission determines otherwise. 2 Subsequently, the IC Order requirements were imposed through license condition on new or amended NRC licenses authorizing the possession of radioactive materials in quantities of concern as identified in Attachment 2 to this Order. In addition, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, because of the potentially significant adverse impacts associated with a deliberate malevolent act by an individual with unescorted access to radioactive materials quantities of concern, I find that the public health and safety require that this Order be effective immediately. III Accordingly, pursuant to sections 81, 149, 161b, 161i, 161o, 182, and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202, 10 CFR parts 30 and 33, *It is hereby ordered* , effective immediately, that all licensees identified in attachment 1 to this order shall comply with the requirements of this order as follows: A. 1. The Licensee shall, within ninety
(90)days of the date of this Order, establish and maintain a fingerprinting program that meets the requirements of Attachment 3 of this Order for individuals that require unescorted access to certain radioactive materials. 2. Within ninety
(90)days of the date of this Order, the Licensee shall provide under oath or affirmation, a certification that the Trustworthiness and Reliability (T&R) Official (an individual with the responsibility to determine the trustworthiness and reliability of another individual requiring unescorted access to the radioactive materials identified in Attachment 2) is deemed trustworthy and reliable by the Licensee as required in paragraph B.2 of this Order. 3. The Licensee shall, in writing, within sixty
(60)days of the date of this Order, notify the Commission,
(1)if it is unable to comply with any of the requirements described in this Order or in Attachment 3 to this Order,
(2)if compliance with any of the requirements is unnecessary in its specific circumstances, or
(3)if implementation of any of the requirements would cause the Licensee to be in violation of the provisions of any Commission regulation or its license. The notification shall provide the Licensee's justification for seeking relief from or variation of any specific requirement. 4. The Licensee shall complete implementation of the program established in accordance with paragraph A.1 of this Order by June 2, 2008. In addition to the notifications in paragraphs 2 and 3 above, the Licensee shall notify the Commission within twenty-five
(25)days after they have achieved full compliance with the requirements described in Attachment 3 to this Order. If by June 2, 2008, the Licensee is unable, due to circumstances beyond its control, to complete implementation of this Order, the Licensee shall submit a written request to the Commission explaining the need for an extension of time to implement the requirements. The request shall provide the Licensee's justification for seeking more time to comply with the requirements of this Order. 5. Licensees shall notify the NRC's Headquarters Operations Office at 301-816-5100 within 24 hours if the results from a FBI identification and criminal history records check indicate that an individual is identified on the FBI's Terrorist Screening Data Base. B. 1. Except as provided in paragraph E for individuals who are currently approved for unescorted access, the Licensee shall grant access to radioactive material in Attachment 2 in accordance with the requirements of IC.1. of the Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090) and the requirements of this Order. 2. The T&R Official, if he/she does not require unescorted access, must be deemed trustworthy and reliable by the Licensee in accordance with the requirements of IC.1. of the Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090) before making a determination regarding the trustworthiness and reliability of another individual. If the T&R Official requires unescorted access, the Licensee must consider the results of fingerprinting and the review of an FBI identification and criminal history records check as a component in approving a T&R Official. C. Prior to requesting fingerprints from any individual, the Licensee shall provide a copy of this Order to that person. D. Upon receipt of the results of FBI identification and criminal history records checks, the Licensee shall control such information as specified in the “Protection of Information” section of Attachment 3 of this Order and in requirement IC.5 of the Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090). E. The Licensee shall make determinations on continued unescorted access for persons currently granted unescorted access, by June 2, 2008, based upon the results of the fingerprinting and FBI identification and criminal history records check. The Licensee may allow any individual who currently has unescorted access to certain radioactive materials in accordance with the IC Order to continue to have unescorted access, pending a decision by the T&R Official. After June 2, 2008 no individual may have unescorted access to radioactive materials without a determination by the T&R Official (based upon fingerprinting, an FBI identification and criminal history records check and a previous trustworthiness and reliability determination) that the individual may have unescorted access to such materials. F. 1. The Licensee shall comply with; and to the extent the recipient of this Order is also the recipient of the Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090), paragraph IC 1.b is superceded by the following: For individuals employed by the licensee for three years or less, and for non-licensee personnel, such as physicians, physicists, house-keeping personnel, and security personnel under contract, trustworthiness and reliability shall be determined, at a minimum, by verifying employment history, education, personal references, and fingerprinting and the review of an FBI identification and criminal history records check. The licensee shall also, to the extent possible, obtain independent information to corroborate that provided by the employee (i.e. seeking references not supplied by the individual). For individuals employed by the licensee for longer than three years, trustworthiness and reliability shall be determined, at a minimum, by a review of the employees' employment history with the licensee and fingerprinting and an FBI identification and criminal history records check. 2. The Licensee shall comply with; and to the extent the recipient of this Order is also the recipient of Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090), Paragraph IC 1.c of that prior Order is superceded by, the following: Service provider licensee employees shall be escorted unless determined to be trustworthy and reliable by an NRC-required background investigation. Written verification attesting to or certifying the person's trustworthiness and reliability shall be obtained from the licensee providing the service. 3. For Licensees who have previously received the Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090), “Table 1: Radionuclides of Concern” is superceded by Attachment 2 to include Ra-226. The previous Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090) will, therefore, also apply to Ra-226 as noted in Attachment 2. Licensee responses to A.1, A.2., A.3. and A.4., above shall be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Licensee responses shall be marked as “Security-Related Information—Withhold Under 10 CFR 2.390.” The Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, may, in writing, relax or rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration of good cause by the Licensee. IV In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the Licensee must, and any other person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an answer to this Order within thirty
(30)days of the date of this Order. In addition, the Licensee and any other person adversely affected by this Order may request a hearing of this Order within thirty
(30)days of the date of the Order. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the time to request a hearing. A request for extension of time must be made, in writing, to the Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and include a statement of good cause for the extension. The answer may consent to this Order. If the answer includes a request for a hearing, it shall, under oath or affirmation, specifically set forth the matters of fact and law on which the Licensee relies and the reasons as to why the Order should not have been issued. If a person other than the Licensee requests a hearing, that person shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his interest is adversely affected by this Order and shall address the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d). A request for a hearing must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, which became effective on October 15, 2007. The E-Filing Final Rule was issued on August 28, 2007, (72 FR 49,139). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve documents over the internet or, in some cases, to mail copies on electronic optical storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek a waiver in accordance with the procedures described below. To comply with the procedural requirements associated with E-Filing, at least five
(5)days prior to the filing deadline the requestor must contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at *HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV* , or by calling
(301)415-1677, to request
(1)a digital ID certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any NRC proceeding in which it is participating; and/or
(2)creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances when the requestor (or its counsel or representative) already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Each requestor will need to download the Workplace Forms Viewer TM to access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the E-Filing system. The Workplace Forms Viewer TM is free and is available at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-viewer.html* . Information about applying for a digital ID certificate also is available on NRC's public Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html* . Once a requestor has obtained a digital ID certificate, had a docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, it can then submit a request for a hearing through EIE. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format
(PDF)in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC public Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html* . A filing is considered complete at the time the filer submits its document through EIE. To be timely, electronic filings must be submitted to the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The EIE system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the document on those participants separately. Therefore, any others who wish to participate in the proceeding (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request is filed so that they may obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system. A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html* or by calling the NRC technical help line, which is available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. The help line number is
(800)397-4209 or locally,
(301)415-4737. Participants who believe that they have good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file a motion, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by
(1)first class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, *Attention:* Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or
(2)courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at *http://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp* , unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, or a Presiding Officer. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, Participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their works. If a hearing is requested by the Licensee or a person whose interest is adversely affected, the Commission will issue an Order designating the time and place of any hearing. If a hearing is held the issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Order should be sustained. Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), the Licensee may, in addition to requesting a hearing, at the time the answer is filed or sooner, move the presiding officer to set aside the immediate effectiveness of the Order on the ground that the Order, including the need for immediate effectiveness, is not based on adequate evidence but on mere suspicion, unfounded allegations, or error. In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions specified in Section III above shall be final twenty
(20)days from the date of this Order without further order or proceedings. If an extension of time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions specified in Section III shall be final when the extension expires if a hearing request has not been received. An answer or a request for hearing shall not stay the immediate effectiveness of this order. Dated this 5th day of December, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Charles L. Miller, Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs. Attachment 1: List of Applicable Materials Licensees; Redacted Attachment 2: Table 1: Radionuclides of Concern Table 1.—Radionuclides of Concern Radionuclide Quantity of concern 1
(TBq)Quantity of concern 2 (Ci ) Am-241 0.6 16 Am-241/Be 0.6 16 Cf-252 0.2 5.4 Cm-244 0.5 14 Co-60 0.3 8.1 Cs-137 1 27 Gd-153 10 270 Ir-192 0.8 22 Pm-147 400 11,000 Pu-238 0.6 16 Pu-239/Be 0.6 16 Ra-226 5 0.4 11 Se-75 2 54 Sr-90 (Y-90) 10 270 Tm-170 200 5,400 Yb-169 3 81 Combinations of radioactive materials listed above 3 See Footnote Below 4 1 The aggregate activity of multiple, collocated sources of the same radionuclide should be included when the total activity equals or exceeds the quantity of concern. 2 The primary values used for compliance with this Order are TBq. The curie
(Ci)values are rounded to two significant figures for informational purposes only. 3 Radioactive materials are to be considered aggregated or collocated if breaching a common physical security barrier (e.g., a locked door at the entrance to a storage room) would allow access to the radioactive material or devices containing the radioactive material. 4 If several radionuclides are aggregated, the sum of the ratios of the activity of each source, i of radionuclide, n, A <sup>(i,n)</sup> , to the quantity of concern for radionuclide n, Q <sup>(n)</sup> , listed for that radionuclide equals or exceeds one. [(aggregated source activity for radionuclide A) ÷ (quantity of concern for radionuclide A)] + [(aggregated source activity for radionuclide B) ÷ (quantity of concern for radionuclide B)] + etc..... ≥1 5 On August 31, 2005, the NRC issued a waiver, in accordance to Section 651(e) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, for the continued use and/or regulatory authority of Naturally Occurring and Accelerator-Produced Material (NARM), which includes Ra-226. The NRC plans to terminate the waiver in phases, beginning November 30, 2007, and ending on August 7, 2009. The NRC has authority to regulate discrete sources of Ra-226, but has refrained from exercising that authority until the date of an entity's waiver termination. For entities that possess Ra-226 in quantities of concern, this Order becomes effective upon waiver termination. For information on the schedule for an entity's waiver termination, please refer to the NARM Toolbox Web site at *http://nrc-stp.ornl.gov/narmtoolbox.html* . Attachment 3: Specific Requirements Pertaining to Fingerprinting and Criminal History Records Checks The new fingerprinting requirements supplement previous requirements issued by the Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090). Licensees currently have a program to grant unescorted access to individuals. As required by condition A.1 of the Order, Licensees shall modify its current trustworthiness and reliability program to include the following: 1. Each Licensee subject to the provisions of this attachment shall fingerprint each individual who is seeking or permitted unescorted access to risk significant radioactive materials equal to or greater than the quantities listed in attachment 2. The Licensee shall review and use the information received from the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI)identification and criminal history records check and ensure that the provisions contained in the subject Order and this attachment are satisfied. 2. The Licensee shall notify each affected individual that the fingerprints will be used to secure a review of his/her criminal history record and inform the individual of the procedures for revising the record or including an explanation in the record, as specified in the “Right to Correct and Complete Information” section of this attachment. 3. Fingerprints for unescorted access need not be taken if an employed individual (e.g., a Licensee employee, contractor, manufacturer, or supplier) is relieved from the fingerprinting requirement by 10 CFR 73.61, or any person who has been favorably-decided by a U.S. Government program involving fingerprinting and an FBI identification and criminal history records check (e.g. National Agency Check, Transportation Worker Identification Credentials in accordance with 49 CFR part 1572, Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives background checks and clearances in accordance with 27 CFR part 555, Health and Human Services security risk assessments for possession and use of select agents and toxins in accordance with 42 CFR part 73, Hazardous Material security threat assessment for hazardous material endorsement to commercial drivers license in accordance with 49 CFR part 1572, Customs and Border Patrol's Free and Secure Trade Program 1 ) within the last five
(5)calendar years, or any person who has an active federal security clearance (provided in the latter two cases that they make available the appropriate documentation 2 ). Written confirmation from the Agency/employer which granted the federal security clearance or reviewed the FBI criminal history records results based upon a fingerprint identification check must be provided. The Licensee must retain this documentation for a period of three
(3)years from the date the individual no longer requires unescorted access to certain radioactive material associated with the Licensee's activities. 1 The FAST program is a cooperative effort between the Bureau of Customs and Border Patrol and the governments of Canada and Mexico to coordinate processes for the clearance of commercial shipments at the U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico borders. Participants in the FAST program, which requires successful completion of a background records check, may receive expedited entrance privileges at the northern and southern borders. 2 This documentation must allow the T&R Official to verify that the individual has fulfilled the unescorted access requirements of Section 149 of the AEA by submitting to fingerprinting and an FBI identification and criminal history records check. 4. All fingerprints obtained by the Licensee pursuant to this Order must be submitted to the Commission for transmission to the FBI. Additionally, the Licensee shall submit a certification of the trustworthiness and reliability of the T&R Official as determined in accordance with paragraph B.2 of this Order. 5. The Licensee shall review the information received from the FBI and consider it, in conjunction with the trustworthiness and reliability requirements of the IC Order (EA-05-090), in making a determination whether to grant unescorted access to certain radioactive materials. 6. The Licensee shall use any information obtained as part of a criminal history records check solely for the purpose of determining an individual's suitability for unescorted access to risk significant radioactive materials equal to or greater than the quantities listed in attachment 2. 7. The Licensee shall document the basis for its determination whether to grant, or continue to allow unescorted access to risk significant radioactive materials equal to or greater than the quantities listed in attachment 2. Prohibitions A Licensee shall not base a final determination to deny an individual unescorted access to certain radioactive material solely on the basis of information received from the FBI involving: an arrest more than one
(1)year old for which there is no information of the disposition of the case, or an arrest that resulted in dismissal of the charge or an acquittal. A Licensee shall not use information received from a criminal history check obtained pursuant to this Order in a manner that would infringe upon the rights of any individual under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, nor shall the Licensee use the information in any way which would discriminate among individuals on the basis of race, religion, national origin, sex, or age. Right to Correct and Complete Information Prior to any final adverse determination, the Licensee shall make available to the individual the contents of any criminal records obtained from the FBI for the purpose of assuring correct and complete information. Written confirmation by the individual of receipt of this notification must be maintained by the Licensee for a period of one
(1)year from the date of the notification. If, after reviewing the record, an individual believes that it is incorrect or incomplete in any respect and wishes to change, correct, or update the alleged deficiency, or to explain any matter in the record, the individual may initiate challenge procedures. These procedures include either direct application by the individual challenging the record to the agency (i.e., law enforcement agency) that contributed the questioned information, or direct challenge as to the accuracy or completeness of any entry on the criminal history record to the Assistant Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation Identification Division, Washington, DC 20537-9700 (as set forth in 28 CFR part 16.30 through 16.34). In the latter case, the FBI forwards the challenge to the agency that submitted the data and requests that agency to verify or correct the challenged entry. Upon receipt of an Official communication directly from the agency that contributed the original information, the FBI Identification Division makes any changes necessary in accordance with the information supplied by that agency. The Licensee must provide at least ten
(10)days for an individual to initiate an action challenging the results of an FBI identification and criminal history records check after the record is made available for his/her review. The Licensee may make a final unescorted access to certain radioactive material determination based upon the criminal history record only upon receipt of the FBI's ultimate confirmation or correction of the record. Upon a final adverse determination on unescorted access to certain radioactive material, the Licensee shall provide the individual its documented basis for denial. Unescorted access to certain radioactive material shall not be granted to an individual during the review process. Protection of Information 1. Each Licensee who obtains a criminal history record on an individual pursuant to this Order shall establish and maintain a system of files and procedures for protecting the record and the personal information from unauthorized disclosure. 2. The Licensee may not disclose the record or personal information collected and maintained to persons other than the subject individual, his/her representative, or to those who have a need to access the information in performing assigned duties in the process of determining unescorted access to certain radioactive material. No individual authorized to have access to the information may re-disseminate the information to any other individual who does not have a need-to-know. 3. The personal information obtained on an individual from a criminal history record check may be transferred to another Licensee if the Licensee holding the criminal history record check receives the individual's written request to re-disseminate the information contained in his/her file, and the gaining Licensee verifies information such as the individual's name, date of birth, social security number, sex, and other applicable physical characteristics for identification purposes. 4. The Licensee shall make criminal history records, obtained under this section, available for examination by an authorized representative of the NRC to determine compliance with the regulations and laws. 5. The Licensee shall retain all fingerprint and criminal history records from the FBI, or a copy if the individual's file has been transferred, for three
(3)years after termination of employment or determination of unescorted access to certain radioactive material (whether unescorted access was approved or denied). After the required three
(3)year period, these documents shall be destroyed by a method that will prevent reconstruction of the information in whole or in part. [FR Doc. E7-24197 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD Agency Forms Submitted for OMB Review, Request for Comments SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Railroad Retirement Board
(RRB)is forwarding an Information Collection Request
(ICR)to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)to request a revision to a currently approved collection of information: 3220-0185, Report of Medicaid State Office on Beneficiary's In Status consisting of Form RL-380-F, Report to State Medicaid Office. Our ICR describes the information we seek to collect from the public. Review and approval by OIRA ensures that we impose appropriate paperwork burdens. The RRB invites comments on the proposed collection of information to determine
(1)the practical utility of the collection;
(2)the accuracy of the estimated burden of the collection;
(3)ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information that is the subject of collection; and
(4)ways to minimize the burden of collections on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments to RRB or OIRA must contain the OMB control number of the ICR. For proper consideration of your comments, it is best if RRB and OIRA receive them within 30 days of publication date. Under Section 7(d) of the Railroad Retirement Act, the RRB administers the Medicare program for persons covered by the railroad retirement system. Under Section 1843 of the Social Security Act, states may enter into “buy-in agreements” with the Secretary of Health and Human Services for the purpose of enrolling certain groups of low-income individuals under the Medicare medical insurance (Part B) program and paying the premiums for their insurance coverage. Generally, these individuals are categorically needy under Medicaid and meet the eligibility requirements for Medicare Part B. States can also include in their buy-in agreements, individuals who are eligible for medical assistance only. The RRB uses Form RL-380-F, Report to State Medicaid Office, to obtain information needed to determine if certain railroad beneficiaries are entitled to receive Supplementary Medical Insurance program coverage under a state buy-in agreement in states in which they reside. Completion of Form RL-380-F is voluntary. One response is received from each respondent. At the request of various state Medicaid offices, the RRB proposes revisions to Form RL-380-F to add items requesting a beneficiary's Part A and Part B effective date. The new information will assist them in locating pertinent records of the subject beneficiary. Other minor non-burden impacting editorial changes are proposed. *Previous Requests for Comments:* The RRB has already published the initial 60-day notice (72 FR 57078 on October 5, 2007) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That request elicited no comments. Information Collection Request
(ICR)*Title:* Report of Medicaid State Office on Beneficiary's Buy-In Status. *OMB Control Number:* 3220-0185. *Form(s) submitted:* RL-380-F. *Type of request:* Revision of a currently approved collection. *Affected public:* State, Local or Tribal government. *Abstract:* Under the Railroad Retirement Act, the Railroad Retirement Board administers the Medicare program for persons covered by the railroad retirement system. The collection obtains the information needed to determine if certain railroad beneficiaries are entitled to receive Supplementary Medical Insurance program coverage under a state buy-in agreement in states in which they reside. *Changes Proposed:* The RRB proposes to add items requesting a beneficiary's Part A and Part B effective date to Form RL-380-F. Other minor non-burden impacting editorial changes are proposed. *The burden estimate for the ICR is as follows:* *Estimated Completion Time for Form(s):* Completion time for Form RL-380-F is estimated at 10 minutes. *Estimated annual number of respondents:* 600. *Total annual responses:* 600. *Total annual reporting hours:* 100. *Additional Information or Comments:* Copies of the forms and supporting documents can be obtained from Charles Mierzwa, the agency clearance officer (312-751-3363) or *Charles.Mierzwa@rrb.gov.* Comments regarding the information collection should be sent to Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2092 or *Ronald.Hodapp@RRB.GOV,* and to the Office of Management Budget at ATTN: Desk Officer for RRB, FAX :
(202)395-6974 or via E-mail to *OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov* . Charles Mierzwa, Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7-24153 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7905-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC 20549-0213. *Extension:* Form ADV; SEC File No. 270-39; OMB Control No. 3235-0049. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ) the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. The title for the collection of information is “Form ADV” (17 CFR 279.1). Form ADV is the investment adviser registration form filed electronically with the Commission pursuant to rules 203-1 (17 CFR 275.203-1) and 204-1 (17 CFR 275.204-1) under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-1 *et seq.* ) by advisers registered with the Commission or applying for registration with the Commission. The information collected takes the form of disclosures to the investment adviser's clients and potential clients. The purpose of this collection of information is to provide advisory clients, prospective clients, and the Commission with information about the adviser, its business, and its conflicts of interest. Clients use certain of the information to determine whether to hire or retain an adviser. The information collected provides the Commission with knowledge about the adviser, its business, and its conflicts of interest. The Commission uses the information to determine eligibility for registration with the Commission and to manage its regulatory, examination, and enforcement programs. Respondents to the collection of information are investment advisers registered with the Commission or applying for registration with the Commission. The Commission estimates that the total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden of the collection of information for each respondent is 23.375 hours. This collection of information is found at 17 CFR 279.1 and it is mandatory. The information collected pursuant to Form ADV are filings with the Commission. These disclosures are not kept confidential and must be preserved until at least three years after termination of the enterprise. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. General comments regarding the above information should be directed to the following persons:
(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 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 to OMB within 30 days of this notice. December 6, 2007. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-24080 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC 20549-0213. Extension: Rule 204-3; SEC File No. 270-42; OMB Control No. 3235-0047 Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ) the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below. The title for the collection of information is “Rule 204-3 (17 CFR 275.204-3) under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.” (15 U.S.C. 80b). Rule 204-3, the “brochure rule,” requires an investment adviser to deliver their brochure to their new clients or prospective clients before or at the start of the advisory relationship. The brochure assists the client in determining whether to retain, or continue employing, the adviser. Rule 204-3 also requires that an investment adviser deliver, or offer in writing to deliver upon written request, the brochure to their existing clients annually in order to provide them with current information about the adviser. Under rule 204-3, the investment adviser must furnish the required information to clients and prospective clients by providing either a copy of Part II of Form ADV, the investment adviser registration form, or a written document containing at least the information required by Part II of Form ADV. This collection of information is found at 17 CFR 275.204-3 and is mandatory. The respondents to this information collection are investment advisers registered with the Commission. The Commission has estimated that compliance with rule 204-3 imposes a burden of approximately 639.87 hours annually based on an average adviser having 670 clients. Our latest data indicate that there were 10,787 advisers registered with the Commission as of August 31, 2007. Based on this figure, the Commission estimates a total annual burden of 6,902,278 hours for this collection of information. Rule 204-3 does not require recordkeeping or record retention. The collection of information requirements under the rule are mandatory. The information collected pursuant to the rule are not filed with the Commission, but rather take the form of disclosures to clients. Accordingly, these filings are not kept confidential. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Please direct general comments regarding the above information to the following persons:
(i)Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or 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 to OMB within 30 days of this notice. Dated: December 6, 2007. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-24081 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting Federal Register citation of previous announcement: 72 FR 69258, December 7, 2007. Status: Open Meeting. Place: 100 F Street, NW., Washington, DC. Date and time of previously announced meeting: Tuesday, December 11, 2007. Change in the meeting: Deletion of an Item. The following item was not considered during the Open Meeting on Tuesday, December 11, 2007: Whether to approve the 2008 budget of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board and will consider the related annual accounting support fee for the Board under Section 109 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, please contact the Office of the Secretary at
(202)551-5400. Dated: December 11, 2007. Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-24213 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56926; File No. SR-OPRA-2007-05] Options Price Reporting Authority; Notice of Filing of Proposed Amendment to the Plan for Reporting of Consolidated Options Last Sale Reports and Quotation Information To Adopt New Form of Rider to OPRA's Vendor Agreement for Use by Television Companies That Wish To Disseminate OPRA Data December 7, 2007. Pursuant to Section 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 608 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on December 6, 2007, the Options Price Reporting Authority (“OPRA”) submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) an amendment to the Plan for Reporting of Consolidated Options Last Sale Reports and Quotation Information (“OPRA Plan”). 3 The proposed OPRA Plan amendment would adopt a new form of Television Dissemination Rider to OPRA's Vendor Agreement for use by television companies that wish to disseminate current OPRA Data via a passive scrolling or ticker television display. OPRA's Fee Schedule would be modified to incorporate the fee that OPRA would charge for the dissemination of OPRA Data in the manner discussed below. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments from interested persons on the proposed OPRA Plan amendment. 1 15 U.S.C. 78k-1. 2 17 CFR 242.608. 3 The OPRA Plan is a national market system plan approved by the Commission pursuant to Section 11A of the Act and Rule 608 thereunder (formerly Rule 11Aa3-2). *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 17638 (March 18, 1981), 22 S.E.C. Docket 484 (March 31, 1981). The full text of the OPRA Plan is available at *http://www.opradata.com* . The OPRA Plan provides for the collection and dissemination of last sale and quotation information on options that are traded on the participant exchanges. The six participants to the OPRA Plan are the American Stock Exchange LLC, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc., the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated, the International Securities Exchange, LLC, the NYSE Arca, Inc., and the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. I. Description and Purpose of the Amendment OPRA proposes to amend its national market system plan by adopting a new form of Rider to its Vendor Agreement for use by television companies that wish to disseminate current OPRA Data from OPRA's Basic Service via a passive scrolling or ticker television display. The OPRA Fee Schedule would be modified to incorporate the fee that OPRA would charge for the dissemination of OPRA Data in the manner discussed below. 4 4 OPRA has filed two other filings that will affect its Fee Schedule upon or following their effectiveness: SR-OPRA-2007-03 (eliminating the “FCO Service” column on the Fee Schedule when all currently outstanding physical delivery FCOs are eliminated by expiration or by closing transaction, which could be as late as March 14, 2008); and SR-OPRA-2007-04 (amending the Fee Schedule to specify Professional Subscriber Device-Based Fees commencing as of January 1 of 2008, 2009 and 2010). The changes proposed in those filings do not affect the changes proposed to the Fee Schedule in this filing. A company that disseminates current OPRA Data to third parties is a “Vendor” for OPRA's purposes, and is therefore required to sign OPRA's Vendor Agreement. As a general matter, OPRA's Vendor Agreement states that any person that receives current OPRA Data from a Vendor is a “Subscriber” and requires the Vendor to cause each of its Subscribers to agree to a Subscriber Agreement, either with the Vendor for the benefit of OPRA, or directly with OPRA. The new form of Rider states that this requirement does not apply to persons that receive OPRA Data in the form of a passive scrolling or ticker television display. The Vendor Agreement also requires that the Vendor report certain information to OPRA to enable OPRA to verify the fees that the Vendor is obligated to pay OPRA. The new form of Rider to OPRA's Vendor Agreement states that the reporting requirements in the Vendor Agreement will not apply to television dissemination of OPRA Data and sets out requirements that are intended to elicit only the information that OPRA needs to verify the fees paid by a television company for television dissemination. The OPRA Data feed includes, in addition to options last sale and quotation data, the values of various indexes for which OPRA or one of the OPRA participant exchanges has permission to disseminate from the index owners together with related options market data. Some owners of the indexes that OPRA disseminates may not wish to have OPRA grant television companies the right to disseminate their indexes separate from the dissemination of related options market data. To accommodate this possibility, the Rider includes language to give OPRA the ability to grant permission to Vendor television companies to display index values separately from the dissemination of related options market data, and to revoke that permission. OPRA will treat all television companies that sign Riders identically with respect to permission to display index values. The Rider provides that, if OPRA revokes permission to display particular index values separately from the dissemination of related options market data, and as a consequence the television company Vendor no longer wishes to display OPRA Data values and pay fees for doing so, the television company Vendor may terminate the Rider and its Vendor Agreement, or only the Rider, effective as of the date that the index values cease to be available to the television company Vendor. 5 5 Any Vendor has the right under paragraph 1(c) of the Rider to terminate the Rider, and under paragraph 19(d) of the OPRA form of Vendor Agreement to terminate the Vendor Agreement, in each case without cause upon thirty days written notice. The termination right described in the text essentially provides comfort to a television company Vendor that, if an index ceases to be available to the Vendor on less than thirty days notice, the Vendor may terminate either the Rider alone or the Rider and Vendor Agreement on the date the index ceases to be available. Section 2 of the Rider requires a television company Vendor to display a legend on its television display at least three times a day. The form of the legend is the same as the legend required by the Consolidated Tape Association (“CTA”) for its counterpart Network A service, and the requirement with respect to the display of the legend is the same as the CTA requirement. 6 6 *See* the CTA form of Exhibit C to its form Agreement for Receipt and Use of Consolidated Network A Data and NYSE Market Data for “Cable Broadcasts.” OPRA is proposing to charge a fee for the dissemination via television of current OPRA Data on the basis of the number of “thousands of households reached” by the Vendor television company's programming. 7 This metric is widely used in the television industry and is used by CTA for its counterpart service. 7 Specifically, OPRA plans to charge a fee of $.50 per 1,000 households reached. *See* proposed “Television Display Fee” on the OPRA Fee Schedule. The text of the proposed amendment to the OPRA Plan and the proposed changes to the OPRA Fee Schedule are available at OPRA, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://opradata.com/pdf/proposed_tv_rider.pdf* . II. Implementation of the OPRA Plan Amendment OPRA will begin to use the proposed form Television Dissemination Rider to its Vendor Agreement upon its approval by the Commission pursuant to Section 11A of the Act 8 and Rule 608(b)(1) thereunder. 9 8 15 U.S.C. 78k-1. 9 17 CFR 242.608(b)(1). III. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed OPRA Plan amendment is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-OPRA-2007-05 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-OPRA-2007-05. 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 plan amendment that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed plan amendment 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 am and 3 pm. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of OPRA. 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-OPRA-2007-05 and should be submitted on or before January 3, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 10 10 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(20). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-24121 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56928; File No. SR-Amex-2007-133] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Reduce Certain Clearing Fees December 7, 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 November 30, 2007, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange has designated this proposal as one establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange under section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposal Rule Change The Exchange proposes to reduce the clearing charge for an order in equities or ETFs routed to and executed on another market center from $0.07 to $0.04 per hundred shares. The text of the proposed rule change is available at Amex's principal office, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.amex.com.* II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and
(C)below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
(1)Purpose The Exchange proposes to amend its Equity Fee Schedule and its Exchange Traded Funds and Trust Issued Receipts Fee Schedule to reduce from $0.07 to $0.04 per hundred shares (or $0.0004 per share) the clearing charge for an Amex member order in equities or ETFs routed to and executed on another market center, thereby reducing overall transaction fees for such order routed away from $0.37 to $0.34 per hundred shares (including the $0.30 per hundred routing fee). This fee applies to Amex members only, and the Exchange's goal is to reduce cost disincentives to its members placing orders for Amex-listed securities on the Amex book.
(2)Statutory Basis The proposed fee change is consistent with section 6(b)(4) of the Act 5 regarding the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among exchange members for the following reasons. The reduction of the clearing charge does not discriminate among Amex members, as it is applicable to all Amex members. Further, the proposed fee change will serve to make the Amex more competitive for order flow by bringing its overall fees for routing orders to away markets for execution closer in line with the fees charged by the away markets for similar services. Currently, competitive market centers charge between $0.26 and $0.30 per hundred shares (with the exception of NYSE Arca which charges $0.40 per hundred) 6 to route trades of Amex-listed securities to the Amex itself for execution, and the new Amex aggregate transaction fee of $0.34 per hundred to route orders to away markets for execution (down from $0.37 per hundred as a function of the instant reduction of the clearing fee) places Amex more competitively within that spectrum of fees. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 6 *See, e.g.,* NASDAQ Rule 7018(a) ($0.26-$0.30 per hundred, depending on volume); NYSE Price List 2007, *http://www.nyse.com/pdfs/2007pricelist.pdf,* at page 3 ($0.30 per hundred); NYSE Arca Schedule of Fees and Charges for Exchange Services, *http://www.nyse.com/pdfs/NYSEArca_Equities_Fees.pdf* , at page 1 ($0.40 per hundred). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing proposed rule change is filed pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 7 and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder 8 because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge applicable only to a member imposed by a self-regulatory organization. Accordingly, the proposal is effective upon Commission receipt of the filing. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 8 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 *rulecomments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-Amex-2007-133 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 No. SR-Amex-2007-133. 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 at *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 No. SR-Amex-2007-133 and should be submitted on or before January 3, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 9 9 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-24118 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56923; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-146] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Regarding Fees for the CBOE Stock Exchange December 6, 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 November 30, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“Exchange” or “CBOE”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to modify its fees applicable to the CBOE Stock Exchange (“CBSX”). The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site ( *http://www.cboe.org/legal* ), at the Exchange's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The CBSX fee schedule lists the fees applicable to trading on CBSX. The transaction fees are based on whether the executing member is “taking” liquidity or “making” liquidity in connection with the transaction. Odd-lot transactions, however, have been charged $0.003 per share to both the maker and taker side. This filing proposes to change the odd-lot charge so that it is identical to the round-lot maker-taker charge. Thus, odd-lot takers (odd-lot orders submitted to CBSX) will be charged $0.0029 per share and odd-lot makers (the CBSX Market-Makers that trade against odd-lots) will receive a per-share rebate consistent with the rebate portion of the fee schedule. The filing also amends the way the fees are expressed from “per 100 shares” to “per share” in order to accommodate odd-lots (which involve lots of less than 100 shares). The changes will take effect Monday, December 3, 2007. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 3 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act 4 in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and other persons using its facilities. 3 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 4 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 Because the foregoing proposed rule change establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange, it has become effective upon filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 5 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder. 6 At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 6 17 CFR 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 No. SR-CBOE-2007-146 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-2007-146. 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 filings also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the CBOE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2007-146 and should be submitted on or before January 3, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 7 7 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-24119 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56925; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-141] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend CBOE Rule 2.1 Relating to the Appointment of the Chairman and Members of CBOE's Business Conduct Committee December 7, 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 November 27, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the CBOE. The Exchange filed the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(3) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(3). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The CBOE proposes to amend Exchange Rule 2.1 pertaining to the appointment of the chairman and members of CBOE's Business Conduct Committee (“BCC”). The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, on the Exchange's Web site at *http://www.cboe.com* , and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend CBOE Rule 2.1 by modifying the BCC appointment process. Currently, the Exchange's Vice Chairman of the Board (“member Vice Chairman”), a member position, has the authority to:
(i)Appoint the chairman and members of the BCC, with the approval of the Board;
(ii)remove members in the BCC, with or without cause; and
(iii)fill a vacancy in the BCC for the remainder of the term (collectively referred to as the “Appointment Process”). 5 CBOE proposes to transfer the Appointment Process authority from the member Vice Chairman to the President 6 of the Exchange. 7 CBOE believes that the modification to this rule will enhance CBOE's disciplinary process because the BCC Appointment Process will now be the responsibility of a non-member executive officer, who is not subject to the Exchange's disciplinary jurisdiction. 5 *See* CBOE Rule 2.1(a). 6 CBOE's President is the chief operating officer of CBOE, and, among other duties, oversees the Member and Regulatory Services Division of CBOE. 7 CBOE believes that this rule amendment is similar to the International Securities Exchange (“ISE”) Rule 200, which grants its CEO the authority to appoint members of committees, including ISE's Business Conduct Committee with Board approval. *See* ISE Rule 200. 2. Statutory Basis In modifying the BCC Appointment Process to place the responsibility with a non-member executive officer who is not subject to the Exchange's disciplinary jurisdiction, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 8 in general, and with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 9 in particular, which requires, among other things, that the rules of the Exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation among persons engaged in facilitating securities transactions, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others 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 Exchange has designated this proposal as concerned solely with the administration of the Exchange under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act, 10 and Rule 19b-4(f)(3) thereunder, 11 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(3). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-CBOE-2007-141 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-2007-141. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of CBOE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2007-141 and should be submitted on or before January 3, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-24120 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56927; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-145] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Exchange's Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee December 7, 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 November 30, 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 the Exchange under Section 19(b)(3)(A), 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). 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 Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.cboe.org/legal. * II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, CBOE included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposal. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. CBOE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of this proposed rule change is to amend CBOE's Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee, which is applicable to all Market-Makers, RMMs, DPMs and e-DPMs (collectively “liquidity providers”) in order to promote and encourage more efficient quoting. Under the current fee, CBOE assesses all liquidity providers who are submitting electronic quotations to the Exchange in Hybrid and Hybrid 2.0 option classes a monthly fee of $450 per membership utilized. 5 CBOE also assesses or credits fees on liquidity providers that vary depending on:
(i)the quality of the liquidity providers' quotation (a quotation is a bid and an offer); and
(ii)the value of the underlying security and CBOE's bid in the option series. 6 The fee varies slightly in “high premium series” 7 with respect to Market-Makers and RMMs on the one hand, and DPMs and e-DPMs on the other hand due to the difference in their quoting obligations. 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56602 (October 3, 2007), 72 FR 57620 (October 10, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-116). 6 The value of the underlying security is the closing price of the underlying security on the preceding trading day. The bid is the closing bid in the option series at CBOE on the preceding trading day. 7 For purposes of this fee, “high premium series” are those series in which the underlying security is less than or equal to $100 and CBOE's bid is greater than $10, or those series in which the underlying security is greater than $100 and CBOE's bid is greater than 15% of the underlying security. CBOE believes that the quote mitigation strategies it has implemented, including the Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee, have been effective in mitigating quotations. Some liquidity providers have modified their quoting processes in response to the Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee. Accordingly, CBOE believes that it would be appropriate to reduce slightly certain of the fees and, thus, reduce the total amount of revenue that CBOE collects from the Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee. At the same time, CBOE believes that it would be beneficial to increase the amounts that are credited for competitive quotations that improve or match the NBBO, as an incentive to liquidity providers to submit competitive quotations. Specifically, CBOE proposes to amend certain of the fees that are imposed as part of the Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee as follows: • Increase the amount that a liquidity provider will be credited if its quotation improves the NBBO on at least one side of the market from $.02 to $.10 per 1,000 quotes. • Increase the amount that a liquidity provider will be credited if its quotation matches the NBBO on both sides of the market from $.01 to $.03 per 1,000 quotes. • Decrease the amount that a liquidity provider will be assessed if its quotation matches the NBBO on only one side of the market from $.02 to $0.00. • In high premium series, decrease the amount that a Market-Maker or RMM will be assessed if its quotation matches the CBOE BBO (which is not the NBBO) on at least one side of the market from $.05 to $.04 per 1,000 quotes. • Decrease the amount that a liquidity provider will be assessed if its quotation is a duplicate quote, or if it does not satisfy any of the above conditions, from $.05 to $.04 per 1,000 quotes. The Exchange believes that the Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee, as amended, is fair and reasonable and will continue to promote and encourage more competitive and efficient quoting and help to reduce quote traffic. The fee encourages and rewards liquidity providers that quote competitively, and imposes costs on liquidity providers that do not. CBOE intends to monitor the fee and may amend the fee in the future. As before, the Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee will be assessed by liquidity provider acronym. In the event a liquidity provider is utilizing more than one membership and submits electronic quotations for all of the memberships under the same acronym, the Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee will be assessed per membership utilized by the liquidity provider. Because a liquidity provider's total credits cannot exceed the total debits assessed according to the schedule of credits and debits set forth in the two tables in Item 17 of the CBOE Fees Schedule, if the total credits were to exceed the total debits, the Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee assessed to that liquidity provider would be $450. If a liquidity provider is assessed the Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee, the liquidity provider does not pay a member dues fee. The Exchange intends to implement this revised Hybrid Electronic Quoting Fee effective Monday, December 3, 2007. 2. Statutory Basis The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 8 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 9 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. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 10 and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 11 since it establishes or changes a due, fee or other charge imposed by the Exchange. 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 the furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 11 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-2007-145 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-2007-145. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of CBOE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-CBOE-2007-145 and should be submitted on or before January 3, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-24122 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56919; File No. SR-ISE-2007-114] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Fee Changes December 6, 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 December 3, 2007, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (“Exchange” or “ISE”) 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 ISE. The ISE has designated this proposal as one establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the 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 The ISE is proposing to amend its Schedule of Fees to establish fees for transactions in options on 1 Premium Product. 5 The text of the proposed rule change is available on the ISE's Web site ( *http://www.ise.com* ), at the principal office of the ISE, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. 5 “Premium Products” is defined in the Schedule of Fees as the products enumerated therein. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the ISE included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The ISE has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange is proposing to amend its Schedule of Fees to establish fees for transactions in options on the PowerShares Golden Dragon Halter USX China Portfolio (“PGJ”). 6 The Exchange represents that PGJ 7 is eligible for options trading because it constitutes “Fund Shares,” as defined by ISE Rule 502(h). 6 PowerShares TM and PGJ TM are trademarks of PowerShares Capital Management LLC (“PowerShares” or the “Adviser”). Halter Financial Group, Inc. (“Halter Financial”) is the index provider for the Golden Dragon Halter USX China Portfolio (“PGJ”). The “USX China Index” is a trademark of Halter Financial and has been licensed for use for certain purposes by the Adviser. All other trademarks and service marks are the property of their respective owners. PGJ is not sponsored, endorsed, sold or promoted by Halter Financial, and Halter Financial makes no representation regarding the advisability of investing in PGJ. Halter Financial and PowerShares have not licensed or authorized ISE to
(i)engage in the creation, listing, provision of a market for trading, marketing, and promotion of options on PGJ or
(ii)to use and refer to any of their trademarks or service marks in connection with the listing, provision of a market for trading, marketing, and promotion of options on PGJ or with making disclosures concerning options on PGJ under any applicable federal or state laws, rules or regulations. Halter Financial and PowerShares do not sponsor, endorse, or promote such activity by ISE, and are not affiliated in any manner with ISE. 7 The Exchange inadvertently included a reference to ILF options and requested that the Commission correct this error. Telephone conversation between Samir Patel, Assistant General Counsel, CBOE, and Sonia Trocchio, Special Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets, Commission (December 6, 2007). All of the applicable fees covered by this filing are identical to fees charged by the Exchange for all other Premium Products. Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to adopt an execution fee and a comparison fee for all transactions in options on PGJ. 8 The amount of the execution fee and comparison fee for products covered by this filing shall be $0.15 and $0.03 per contract, respectively, for all Public Customer Orders 9 and Firm Proprietary orders. The amount of the execution fee and comparison fee for all ISE Market Maker transactions shall be equal to the execution fee and comparison fee currently charged by the Exchange for ISE Market Maker transactions in equity options. 10 Finally, the amount of the execution fee and comparison fee for all non-ISE Market Maker transactions shall be $0.37 and $0.03 per contract, respectively. 11 Further, since options on PGJ are multiply-listed, the Payment for Order Flow fee shall apply to this product. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change will further the Exchange's goal of introducing new products to the marketplace that are competitively priced. 8 These fees will be charged only to Exchange members. Under a pilot program that is set to expire on July 31, 2008, these fees will also be charged to Linkage Orders (as defined in ISE Rule 1900). *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56128 (July 24, 2007), 72 FR 42161 (August 1, 2007) (SR-ISE-2007-55). 9 “Public Customer Order” is defined in Exchange Rule 100(a)(39) as an order for the account of a Public Customer. “Public Customer” is defined in Exchange Rule 100(a)(38) as a person that is not a broker or dealer in securities. 10 The execution fee is currently between $.21 and $.12 per contract side, depending on the Exchange Average Daily Volume, and the comparison fee is currently $.03 per contract side. 11 The amount of the execution and comparison fee for non-ISE Market Maker transactions executed in the Exchange's Facilitation and Solicitation Mechanisms is $0.16 and $0.03 per contract, respectively. 2. Statutory Basis The basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is the requirement under section 6(b)(4) of the Act 12 that an exchange have an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its members and other persons using its facilities. 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested parties. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange, it has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3) of the Act 13 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 14 thereunder. 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. 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 14 17 CFR 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 No. SR-ISE-2007-114 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-2007-114. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the ISE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2007-114 and should be submitted on or before January 3, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 15 15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-24088 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56920; File No. SR-NYSE-2007-111] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Add Rule 48 Permitting the Exchange to Declare an Extreme Market Volatility Condition December 6, 2007. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on December 5, 2007, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the NYSE. The NYSE has designated the proposed rule change as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposed rule change effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The NYSE is proposing to add NYSE Rule 48 to permit the Exchange to declare an extreme market volatility condition and suspend certain NYSE requirements relating to the opening of securities at the Exchange. The text of the proposed rule change is available on *http://www.nyse.com,* at NYSE, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the NYSE 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 NYSE has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange is proposing to add NYSE Rule 48 to provide the Exchange with the ability to suspend the requirement to disseminate price indications and obtain Floor Official approval prior to the opening when extremely high market volatility could negatively affect the operation of the market by causing Floor-wide delays in the opening of securities on the Exchange. The Exchange believes that this rule change is necessary to ensure the fair and orderly operation of the Exchange market. *Background.* NYSE Rule 123D(1) states that specialists are responsible for ensuring that registered securities open as close to the scheduled opening of trading on the Exchange as possible and that the opening be fair and orderly. When arranging the opening price of a security, specialists must make a professional assessment of market conditions at the time, including considering the balance of supply and demand as reflected by orders in the market, any price disparity from the prior close, and such other market conditions that would affect the opening price of a security. While the specialist has ultimate responsibility under the rule for opening a security, in certain situations arising out of unusual market conditions, specialists must obtain prior Floor Official approval of the price at which they will open trading in the security. For example, the rule provides that specialists should consult with a Floor Official as soon as it becomes apparent that an unusual trading situation exists. The rule further provides that a specialist should consult with a Floor Governor if it is anticipated that the opening price may be at a significant disparity from the prior close. In the event of a large pre-opening order imbalance or before a stock opens at a large price change, specialists must publicly disseminate a price indication at least once (and possibly more than once, depending on pre-opening interest) before opening a security. For securities priced under $10, such indications are mandatory if the price change is one dollar or more; for securities between $10 and $99.99, indications are required for price movements of the lesser of 10% or three dollars; and for securities over $100, indications are required for price movements of five dollars or more. NYSE Rule 123D(1) requires supervision and approval by a Floor Official for all such indications. In addition to these requirements, NYSE Rule 79A.30 requires specialists to obtain prior Floor Official approval if a security is going to open at one or more dollars away from the closing price at the Exchange when the closing price was under $20 a share, or two dollars or more away from the closing price at the Exchange when the closing price was $20 per share or more. *Proposed New Rule 48.* The requirements described above are designed to ensure that in unusual situations, there is an impartial professional assessment of the proposed opening price and that advice for specialists is available when a significant disparity in supply and demand exists. The Exchange continues to believe that these requirements are, in most cases, desirable and enhance the fair and orderly operation of the market. Recently, the equities markets world-wide have experienced unprecedented levels of volatility, which has caused unprecedented levels of pre-opening interest and volatility in the United States markets around the opening of the markets. When these extreme levels of volatility occur Floor-wide, the pre-opening requirements described above, instead of facilitating the fair and orderly operation of the markets, can have the paradoxical effect of impeding the fair and orderly operation of the market. For example, Exchange systems currently are programmed such that only NYSE operations staff can publish the mandatory pre-opening indications to the Consolidated Tape. On a regular trading day, when such notices occur in only a subset of its listed securities, the Exchange has sufficient resources to ensure the timely publication of such notices. But on days when the Exchange experiences extremely high Floor-wide market volatility that would stress the Exchange's staffing resources, the Exchange wants to ensure that openings are not delayed due to difficulties in timely publishing the mandatory indications. Similarly, as noted above, in unusual market situations, Floor Officials, and in certain circumstances, Senior Floor Officials, Floor Governors, and Executive Floor Governors, need to be involved on a security-by-security basis before a stock can open at the Exchange. In the event of an extreme, Floor-wide market volatility condition, the Exchange is concerned that Floor Officials would not be able to timely review each security that faces an unusual market condition. In such case, the operation of the Exchange could be significantly impaired and investors adversely impacted because securities cannot be opened on a timely basis. For example, on Friday, August 17, 2007, due to a confluence of factors, including the impact of the sub-prime mortgage crisis on market volatility and the Federal Reserve Board's announcement that it had approved a 50 basis point reduction in the primary credit rate, the securities markets experienced an extreme level of market volatility that affected securities across industry lines. At the Exchange, because of the overwhelming imbalance of pre-opening orders and price variations from the prior day's close, specialists were required to disseminate price indications and consult with and obtain prior Floor Official approval before opening trading in large numbers of stocks. Because of the number of securities impacted by that extreme market volatility, this process could not be completed for approximately 300 securities before the scheduled opening of trading. As a result, the Exchange experienced Floor-wide delays in the opening of securities that impaired the ability of the Exchange to operate efficiently. This Floor-wide delay also impacted those customers that had already submitted orders to the Exchange for execution and who had to wait until trading opened before such orders could be executed. As proposed, in the event of extremely high market volatility that would have a Floor-wide impact on the ability of specialists to arrange for the timely opening of trading at the Exchange under the normal rules, NYSE Rule 48 would permit a qualified Exchange officer to declare an extreme market volatility condition. For purposes of the rule, a “qualified Exchange officer” means the Chief Executive Officer of NYSE Euronext, Inc. or his or her designee, or the Chief Executive Officer of NYSE Regulation, Inc., or his or her designee. While either may declare the extreme market volatility condition, each must make a reasonable effort to consult with the other prior to taking such action. The proposed rule is intended to be invoked only in those situations where the potential for extreme market volatility would likely impair Floor- wide operations at the Exchange by impeding the fair and orderly opening of securities. Accordingly, the proposed rule sets forth a number of factors that the qualified Exchange officer would have to consider before declaring such a condition, including: volatility during the previous day's trading session; trading in foreign markets before the open; substantial activity in the futures market before the open; the volume of pre-opening indications of interest; evidence of pre-opening significant order imbalances across the market; government announcements; news and corporate events; and any such other market conditions that could impact Floor-wide trading conditions. Once the qualified Exchange officer has reviewed such factors and determined that an extreme market volatility condition exists, the qualified Exchange officer must make reasonable efforts to consult with Commission staff before making such a declaration. The qualified Exchange officer must also document the basis for making such a declaration. If the qualified Exchange officer is unable to reach Commission staff before the opening, he or she may declare such a condition, but must, as promptly as practicable in the circumstances, inform Commission staff of such declaration, and the basis for making such declaration. Because the declaration of an extreme market volatility condition concerns the opening of securities at the Exchange, the proposed rule further provides that such condition must be declared before the scheduled opening of securities at the Exchange. Moreover, such declaration would be in effect only for the opening of that trading session (or reopenings during the same trading day following the imposition of a mandatory halt pursuant to NYSE Rule 80B). Should market conditions that led to the declaration continue on subsequent days, the Exchange would have to review on a day-by-day basis the factors necessitating such a declaration and on each day make a reasonable effort to consult with Commission staff as described above. The Exchange notes that even when the dissemination and Floor Official (including Senior Floor Official and above) approval requirements are suspended, specialists *would remain* responsible for the fair and orderly opening of securities. Exchange rules already provide that when Floor Official approval is sought for certain actions, the specialist remains ultimately responsible for arranging the opening of securities at the Exchange. This obligation would remain unchanged. Even in the absence of price indications and a Floor Official's independent, impartial review of the opening, specialists will still be charged with ensuring that an opening price reflects market conditions and all participants have had a reasonable opportunity to participate. In the event of an extreme market volatility condition, the Exchange represents that it will review actions by the specialist at the opening to ensure that they have met their affirmative market maintenance obligations with respect to arranging a fair and orderly opening of securities at the Exchange. The Exchange notes also that, if proposed Rule 48 were invoked, it would not affect situations where the opening of a security was delayed for reasons unrelated to extreme market volatility, such as where there is material news pending that justifies a regulatory halt under NYSE Rule 123D. In such cases, notwithstanding the invocation of proposed Rule 48, the specialist in the affected security would be expected to follow regular procedures for opening the security (that is, as if proposed Rule 48 had not been invoked). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirement under section 6(b)(5) 5 of the Act that an Exchange have rules that are designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change:
(1)Does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)does not impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)by its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the date of this 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) 6 of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 7 As required under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), 8 the Exchange provided the Commission with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of the filing of the proposed rule change. 6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 6 7 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 8 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 9 normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 10 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The NYSE requests that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay, as specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 11 The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because such waiver would allow the Exchange to immediately implement proposed Rule 48, allowing the Exchange to utilize these new procedures to open trading in a security in a timely manner in extreme market volatility conditions that may occur within 30 days after the filing of this proposed rule change. 12 Accordingly, the Commission designates that the proposed rule change effective and operative upon filing with the Commission. 9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 11 *Id.* 11 12 For purposes only of waiving the operative delay for this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2007-111 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-111. 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 NYSE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-111 and should be submitted on or before January 3, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 13 13 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-24083 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-56924; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-98] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, Relating to the Definition of and Listing Standards for Equity-Linked Notes under NYSE Arca Equities Rules 5.1(b)(14) and 5.2(j)(2) December 7, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 3 notice is hereby given that on September 25, 2007, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca” or “Exchange”), through its wholly-owned subsidiary NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. (“NYSE Arca Equities”), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule changes as described in Items I and II below, which items have been prepared by the Exchange. On October 23, 2007, the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. On December 5, 2007, the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons, and is granting accelerated approval to the proposed rule change. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. 3 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange, through its wholly-owned subsidiary NYSE Arca Equities, proposes to amend its rules governing NYSE Arca, LLC (also referred to as the “NYSE Arca Marketplace”), which is the equities trading facility of NYSE Arca Equities. The Exchange is proposing to amend NYSE Arca Equities Rules 5.1(b)(14), the Exchange's definition of Equity-Linked Notes (“ELNs”), and 5.2(j)(2), the Exchange's listing standards for ELNs, to provide for greater flexibility in the listing criteria for ELNs. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.nyse.com.* II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item III below. The NYSE Arca has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Arca Equities Rules 5.1(b)(14), the Exchange's definition of ELNs, and 5.2(j)(2), the Exchange's listing standards for ELNs, to provide for greater flexibility in the listing criteria for ELNs, as set forth below. 4 The Exchange notes that the Commission has approved similar proposals by the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex”). 5 4 NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(2) was approved by the Commission in September 1996, and was amended once in 2004. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 37648 (September 5, 1996), 61 FR 48195 (September 12, 1996) (SR-PSE-96-23) and 50319 (September 7, 2004), 69 FR 55204 (September 13, 2004) (SR-PCX-2004-75). 5 Amex's initial listing standards for ELNs are set forth in Section 107A of the Amex Company Guide, which was approved by the Commission in March 1990, and Section 107B of the Amex Company Guide, which was approved by the Commission in May 1993. These sections have been amended several times. The filings that are relevant to the topics discussed in this filing are as follows. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 27753 (March 1, 1990), 55 FR 8626 (March 8, 1990) (SR-Amex-89-29) (“Amex March 1990 Release”); 32343 (May 20, 1993), 58 FR 30833 (May 27, 1993) (SR-Amex-92-42) (“Amex May 1993 Release”); 34549 (August 18, 1994), 59 FR 43873 (August 25, 1994) (SR-Amex-93-46) (“Amex August 1994 Release”); 36990 (March 20, 1996), 61 FR 13545 (March 27, 1996) (SR-Amex-95-44) (“Amex March 1996 Release”); 37783 (October 4, 1996), 61 FR 53246 (October 10, 1996) (SR-Amex-96-31) (“Amex October 1996 Release”); 47055 (December 19, 2002), 67 FR 79669 (December 30, 2002) (SR-Amex-2002-110) (“Amex December 2002 Release”); and 55733 (May 10, 2007), 72 FR 27602 (May 16, 2007) (SR-Amex-2007-34) (“Amex May 2007 Release”) (collectively “Amex Releases”). *Number of Linked Securities.* NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.1(b)(14) currently defines ELNs as notes that are linked, in whole or in part, to the market performance of a common stock, non-convertible preferred stock, or sponsored American Depositary Receipts (“ADRs”), which may also be referred to as American Depositary Shares (“ADSs”), overlying such equity securities. The Exchange proposes to amend the definition to simply state that ELNs are defined as notes that are linked, in whole or in part, to the market performance of up to thirty common stocks or non-convertible preferred stocks. This change conforms to Section 107B of the Amex Company Guide. 6 The Exchange proposes to expand the number of stocks that may be linked to ELNs in order to accommodate the varying types of ELN products that are currently offered in the marketplace. The Exchange believes that expanding the number of stocks that may be linked to ELNs will also provide investors with enhanced investment flexibility. The Exchange also believes that there would be no investor protection concerns with expanding the number of stocks linked to ELNs because each linked stock is required to individually satisfy the applicable listing standards set forth in Rule 5.2(j)(2). The Exchange also proposes to delete the reference to ADRs in Rule 5.1(b)(14), as such matter is covered in the listing standards. 6 *See* Amex December 2002 Release, note 5, *supra.* *Issuer Listing Standards.* Rule 5.2(j)(2)(A) currently provides that the issuer of ELNs must be an entity that is listed on a national securities exchange (or an affiliate of a listed company), with a minimum net worth of $150 million. Further, Rule 5.2(j)(2)(A) provides that the market value of an ELN offering, when combined with the market value of all other ELN offerings previously completed by the issuer and currently traded on a national securities exchange, may not be greater than 25% of the issuer's net worth at the time of issuance. The Exchange proposes to amend the issuer listing standards under Rule 5.2(j)(2)(A) to provide for alternative minimum tangible net worth criteria for issuers of ELNs, similar to Section 107B(c) of the Amex Company Guide. 7 Under the proposed Rule, an issuer with minimum tangible net worth in excess of $250 million and otherwise substantially exceeds the pre-tax income from continuing operations of at least $750,000 in its last fiscal year, or in two of its last three fiscal years will not be limited to offerings of ELNs that do not exceed 25% of its net worth. The Exchange believes that this strikes an appropriate balance between the Exchange's responsiveness to innovations in the securities markets and its need to ensure the protection of investors and the public interest. Moreover, the Exchange believes that these changes will not have an adverse impact on the market for ELNs nor its investors since issuers with the lower net worth of $150 million will still be required to limit the amount of their ELN offerings to 25% of their net worth. 7 *See* Amex October 1996 Release, note 5, *supra.* ELNs are dependent upon the individual credit of the issuer. This heightens the possibility that a holder of an ELN may not be able to receive full cash settlement at maturity. The Exchange believes that the proposed alternative net worth standard above, in addition to the proposed additional financial requirements set forth below, reasonably addresses this additional credit risk, and may even serve to minimize this risk. The Exchange also proposes to amend the issuer listing standards under Rule 5.2(j)(2)(A) to apply additional financial standards to issuers, in addition to net worth, which correspond to those set forth in Section 107A(a) of the Amex Company Guide. 8 Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend the issuer listing standards to require that an issuer of ELNs must have assets in excess of $100 million and stockholders' equity of at least $10 million. In addition, the Exchange proposes to amend the issuer listing standards to require that an issuer of ELNs must have one of the following:
(i)Pre-tax income from continuing operations of at least $750,000 in its last fiscal year, or in two of its last three fiscal years;
(ii)assets in excess of $200 million and stockholders' equity of at least $10 million; or
(iii)assets in excess of $100 million and stockholders' equity of at least $20 million. 8 *See* Amex March 1990 Release, note 5, *supra* . The Exchange proposes these additional financial standards to ensure that only the more financially sound companies will be eligible to have their ELNs listed on the Exchange. The Exchange believes that this is important considering the additional or contingent financial obligations created by ELNs, and should serve to protect investors and the public interest by ensuring that the ELNs listed on the Exchange have met predetermined financial criteria set by the Exchange. *ELN Listing Standards.* Rule 5.2(j)(2)(B) currently provides that an issue of ELNs must have a minimum public distribution of one million ELNs, a minimum of 400 holders (provided, however, that if the ELN is traded in $1,000 denominations, there is no minimum number of holders), a minimum market value of $4 million, and a minimum term of one year. The Exchange proposes to add an exception to the minimum public distribution standard in Rule 5.2(j)(2)(B) to provide that if the ELN is traded in $1,000 denominations, there is no minimum public distribution requirement. This change corresponds to Section 107A(b) of the Amex Company Guide. 9 The Exchange notes that, without the exception to the one million ELN minimum public distribution requirement, the Exchange would be unable to list ELNs in $1,000 dollar denominations having a market value of less than $1 billion. The Exchange believes that the proposed exception is a reasonable accommodation for those issuances in $1,000 denominations. 9 *See* Amex May 2007 Release, note 5, *supra* . In addition, the Exchange proposes to add an exception to the holders requirement in Rule 5.2(j)(2)(B) to provide that if the ELNs are redeemable at the option of the holders thereof on at least a weekly basis, there is no minimum number of holders. This change also corresponds to Section 107A(b) of the Amex Company Guide. 10 The Exchange recently submitted a proposal to the Commission to add this exception to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(6) (“Index-Linked Securities”), 11 which was based on a rule proposal by the New York Stock Exchange LLC recently approved by the Commission. 12 The Exchange also proposes to clarify that the holders requirement applies to “public” holders only. 10 *Id* . 11 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56593 (October 1, 2007), 72 FR 57362 (October 9, 2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-96). 12 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56271 (August 16, 2007), 72 FR 47107 (August 22, 2007) (SR-NYSE-2007-74). The Exchange believes that a weekly redemption right will ensure a strong correlation between the market price of the ELNs and the performance of the underlying asset, such as a single security or basket of securities and/or securities index, as holders will be unlikely to sell their securities for less than their redemption value if they have a weekly right to redeem such securities for their full value. In addition, in the case of certain ELNs with a weekly redemption feature, the issuer may have the ability to issue new ELNs from time to time at market prices prevailing at the time of sale, at prices related to market prices, or at negotiated prices. This provides a ready supply of new ELNs, thereby lessening the possibility that the market price of such securities will be affected by a scarcity of available ELNs for sale. The Exchange believes that it also assists in maintaining a strong correlation between the market price and the indicative value, as investors will be unlikely to pay more than the indicative value in the open market if they can acquire ELNs from the issuer at that price. The Exchange believes that the ability to list ELNs with these characteristics without any minimum number of units issued or holders is important to the successful listing of such securities. Issuers issuing these types of ELNs generally do not intend to do so by way of an underwritten offering. Rather, the distribution arrangement is analogous to that of an exchange traded fund issuance, in that the issue is launched without any significant distribution event and the float increases over time as investors purchase additional securities from the issuer at the then indicative value. Investors will generally seek to purchase the securities at a point when the underlying index is at a level that they perceive as providing an attractive growth opportunity. In the context of such a distribution arrangement, it is difficult for an issuer to guarantee its ability to sell a specific number of units on the listing date. However, the Exchange believes that this difficulty in ensuring the sale of one million units or 400 public holders on the listing date is not indicative of a likely long-term lack of liquidity in the securities or, for the reasons set forth in the prior paragraph, of a difficulty in establishing a pricing equilibrium in the securities or a successful two-sided market. *The Linked Securities.* Rule 5.2(j)(2)(C) currently provides minimum standards applicable to the linked securities and the issuers of such securities. The Rule currently provides that the ELNs must be issued by either:
(i)A U.S. company or
(ii)a non-U.S. company that meets certain additional standards. The Exchange proposes to amend the language in the Rule to indicate that an issue of ELNs may be linked to more than one security and, therefore, more than one issuer of a security, in accordance with the Exchange's proposed amendments to Rule 5.1(b)(14), as set forth above. In addition, the Exchange proposes to amend the requirement that the issuer be a U.S. company (in order not to have to meet additional standards of a non-U.S. company) to require that the issuer be a reporting company under the Act listed on a national securities exchange. This change corresponds to Section 107B(e) of the Amex Company Guide. 13 The Exchange proposes this revision in order to encompass non-U.S. companies that have reporting requirements under the federal securities laws, which better addresses the Exchange's concern regarding the public availability of financial information for the issuers of the underlying securities. The Exchange believes that such information serves to protect investors and the public interest. 13 *See* Amex May 1993 Release, note 5, *supra* . In Rule 5.2(j)(2)(C) and (D), the Exchange also proposes certain minor changes in order to clarify certain language, including the language regarding common shares and American Depositary Shares (“ADSs”), generally conforming it to Section 107B(e) of the Amex Company Guide. 14 In Rule 5.2(j)(2)(D), the Exchange also proposes to add the standard that if any non-U.S. security and related securities has less than 20% of the worldwide trading volume occurring in the U.S. market during the six month period preceding the date of listing, then the ELN may not be linked to that non-U.S. security. The Exchange believes that this standard makes sense in the context of the current Rule, 15 and notes that it corresponds to Section 107B(f) of the Amex Company Guide. 16 The Exchange believes that this additional standard is appropriate in that it limits the listing of ELNs linked to non-U.S. securities to those that have a significant amount of U.S. market trading volume, which provides reasonable assurance that the underlying non-U.S. securities are deliverable upon exercise of the ELNs. 14 *See* Amex August 1994 Release, note 5, *supra* . 15 The current Rule provides that the issuance of ELNs relating to underlying non-U.S. securities cannot exceed certain percentage limits of the total outstanding shares of the underlying security. These percentage limits are tied to 20%, 50% and 70% of worldwide trading volume. Therefore, the Rule as currently in effect, does not contemplate less than 20% worldwide trading volume. 16 *See* Amex March 1996 Release, note 5, *supra* . *Additional Changes.* In Rule 5.2(j)(2)(E), the Exchange currently provides that it will distribute an information circular to ETP Holders prior to the commencement of trading of particular ELNs in order to provide guidance to ETP Holders regarding compliance responsibilities (including suitability recommendations and account approval) when handling transactions in ELNs. The Exchange proposes to amend this requirement to provide that the Exchange will evaluate the nature and complexity of the issue and, if appropriate, distribute an information circular to ETP Holders, which conforms with Section 107A of the Amex Company Guide. 17 In determining whether a circular is necessary, the Exchange will consider such characteristics of the issue as: Unit size and term; cash settlement; exercise or call provisions; characteristics that may affect payment of dividends and/or appreciation potential; whether the securities are primarily of retail or institutional interest; and such other features of the issue that might entail special risks not normally associated with securities currently listed on the Exchange. The Exchange proposes this change in order to allow the Exchange greater flexibility while still protecting investors. 17 *See* Amex March 1990 Release, note 5, * supra* . The Exchange also proposes to add new Rule 5.2(j)(2)(F), which provides that ELNs will be treated as equity instruments, in accordance with Section 107B(g) of the Amex Company Guide. 18 The Exchange proposes this change to provide clarity to its ETP Holders that ELNs will be treated as equity instruments for, among other purposes, margin treatment. 18 *See* Amex May 1993 Release, note 5, *supra* . The Exchange also proposes to add that the Exchange may approve for listing and trading ELN's pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act if the requirements of proposed Rule 5.2(j)(2) are met. 19 The Exchange proposes this change to clarify that this requirement applies to ELN's. 19 Telephone conference between Timothy J. Malinowski, Director, Exchange, and Michou H.M. Nguyen, Special Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets, Commission, on December 6, 2007. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 20 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 21 in particular in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaging in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 20 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 21 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received from Members, Participants or Others No written comments were solicited, or received, with respect to the proposed rule change, by NYSE Arca. III. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-98 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-98. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).* Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the 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-2007-98 and should be submitted by January 3, 2008. IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of the Proposed Rule Change After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange 22 and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6 of the Act. 23 Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 24 which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 22 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 23 15 U.S.C. 78f. 24 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The Commission finds good cause for approving the proposed rule change prior to the 30th day after the date of publication of the notice of filing thereof in the **Federal Register** . The proposal seeks to conform the Exchange's rules for ELNs to the rules of the Amex that have previously been approved by the Commission. 25 Therefore, the Commission does not believe that the Exchange's proposal raises any novel regulatory issues. The Commission believes that accelerating approval of this proposal should benefit investors by creating, without undue delay, additional competition in the market for ELNs. 25 *See* Amex Rules 101 and 107; *see also* Amex Release, note 5 *supra* . Therefore the Commission finds good cause, consistent with Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 26 to approve the proposed rule change on an accelerated basis. 26 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). V. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 27 that the proposed rule change, as amended (SR-NYSEArca-2007-98), be, and it hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis. 27 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 28 28 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-24134 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 6025] Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
(ECA)Request for Grant Proposals: Global Connections and Exchange Program. *Announcement Type:* New Grant. *Funding Opportunity Number:* ECA/PE/C/PY-08-13. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:* 00.000. *Key Dates:* *Application Deadline:* February 8, 2008. *Executive Summary:* The Youth Programs Division of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs announces an open competition for the Global Connections and Exchange program. Public and private non-profit organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3) may submit proposals to administer the Global Connections and Exchange program in
(1)Afghanistan and/or
(2)the Palestinian Territories, West Bank only. The Bureau will award one grant for each program. The grantee organizations and/or their partners will select overseas schools and provide them with access to the Internet and related training to develop collaborative partnerships with U.S. schools. Thematic online projects will enhance mutual understanding as they encourage learning, research and free expression among participating schools. All Global Connections and Exchange activities will be undertaken in regular and consistent consultation with the Public Affairs Section
(PAS)of the U.S. Embassy in Kabul and the U.S. Consulate in Jerusalem respectively. Please note that all Global Connections Exchange activities in the Palestinian Territories must be carried out according to all relevant laws and policies regarding assistance to the Palestinian Authority, and to the West Bank and Gaza; organizations should consult with PAS—Jerusalem before entering into any formal arrangements or agreements with Palestinian organizations or institutions. I. Funding Opportunity Description *Authority:* Overall grant making authority for this program is contained in the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, Public Law 87-256, as amended, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the Act is “to enable the Government of the United States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries * * * ; to strengthen the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of the people of the United States and other nations * * * and thus to assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic and peaceful relations between the United States and the other countries of the world.” The funding authority for the program above is provided through legislation. *Purpose:* The Global Connections and Exchange program is designed to introduce youth to a broad range of ideas and resources while enhancing the use of Information and Communication Technology
(ICT)in schools. Through this program, overseas secondary schools will expand computer literacy skills, improve general education, and gain a deeper understanding of U.S. society, culture and values. American students will, in turn, gain a greater understanding of foreign languages and cultures. *Goals:* The overarching goals of the program are:
(1)To use technology as a democratization tool by providing access to information and encouraging free expression via the Internet;
(2)to improve educational tools, resources and learning through the application of ICT and student-centered methodology;
(3)to provide participants with the necessary skills to enable them to apply for exchange and study opportunities in the United States and overseas;
(4)to generate personal and institutional ties across borders among students, educators and their schools;
(5)to promote civil society and youth activism through collaborative projects and online resources;
(6)to increase understanding of the United States through teacher and student exchanges. The following outcomes will indicate a successful project: • Participants will use the Internet as a source of information and means of communication. • Teachers will use technology to complement existing curricula, enhance daily lessons, and create a student-centered classroom environment that enhances critical thinking and problem solving skills. • Participants will develop professional and congenial relationships with people living in different societies and cultures through online and face-to-face interaction. • Participants will gain interest in foreign countries and languages, exchange programs and international issues. • Participants will increase their understanding of civil society and engage in service activities that benefit their communities. *Guidelines:* The two grants are intended to build on a network of schools that have benefited from participation in the program for the past few years. Information about the two programs can be found at the program Web sites: Afghanistan: *http://www.connect-afghanistan.org/index.html;* West Bank: *http://www.connect-middleeast.org/.* Applicants should identify specific objectives and measurable outcomes based on program goals and project specifications provided in the solicitation. Should organizations wish to apply for more than one program, they must submit a separate proposal for each since the two programs will be judged independently. For both programs, applicants must demonstrate their capacity for conducting programs of this nature. This includes administrative infrastructure in the geographic areas and resources to link the foreign schools with schools in the United States to facilitate substantive online programs. The grants to be awarded under this competition will be based upon the quality and responsiveness of proposals to the review criteria presented later in this document. Sub-grant and consortium arrangements are possibilities. Applicants MUST refer to the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation
(POGI)guidelines for details. II. Award Information *Type of Award:* New Grant Agreement. *Fiscal Year Funds:* FY 2008. *Approximate Total Funding:* $350,000. *Approximate Number of Awards:* 2 grants, one for each program. *Average Grant Award:* Afghanistan: $150,000; West Bank: $200,000. *Anticipated Award Date:* Pending availability of funds, April 2008. *Anticipated Project Completion Date:* May 2009. *Additional Information:* Pending successful implementation of this program and the availability of funds in subsequent fiscal years, it is ECA's intent to renew grants awarded under this competition for at least two additional fiscal years, before openly competing it again. III. Eligibility Information III. 1. Eligible applicants: Applications may be submitted by public and private non-profit organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3). III. 2. Cost Sharing or Matching Funds: There is no minimum or maximum percentage required for this competition. However, the Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs. When cost sharing is offered, it is understood and agreed that the applicant must provide the amount of cost sharing as stipulated in its proposal and later included in an approved grant agreement. Cost sharing may be in the form of allowable direct or indirect costs. For accountability, you must maintain written records to support all costs which are claimed as your contribution, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal government. Such records are subject to audit. The basis for determining the value of cash and in-kind contributions must be in accordance with OMB Circular A-110, (Revised), Subpart C.23—Cost Sharing and Matching. In the event you do not provide the minimum amount of cost sharing as stipulated in the approved budget, ECA's contribution will be reduced in like proportion. III. 3. Other Eligibility Requirements: Bureau grant guidelines require that organizations with less than four years experience in conducting international exchanges be limited to $60,000 in Bureau funding. ECA anticipates awarding grants that exceed $60,000 to support program and administrative costs required to implement this program. Therefore, organizations with less than four years experience in conducting international exchanges are ineligible to apply under this competition. The Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs. IV. Application and Submission Information Note: Please read the complete announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. IV.1. Contact Information to Request an Application Package: Please contact The Office of Youth Programs, ECA/PE/C/PY, Room 568, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, telephone
(202)203-7513, and fax
(202)203-7529, e-mail Linda Beach at *BeachLF@state.gov* to request a Solicitation Package. Please refer to the Funding Opportunity Number ECA/PE/C/PY-08-13 located at the top of this announcement when making your request. Alternatively, an electronic application package may be obtained from *http://www.grants.gov.* Please see section IV.3f for further information. The Solicitation Package contains the Proposal Submission Instruction
(PSI)document, which consists of required application forms and standard guidelines for proposal preparation. It also contains the POGI, which provides specific information, award criteria and budget instructions tailored to this competition. Please specify Anna Mussman ( *MussmanAP@state.gov* ) and refer to the Funding Opportunity Number (ECA/PE/C/PY-08-13) located at the top of this announcement on all other inquiries and correspondence. IV.2. To Download a Solicitation Package Via Internet: The entire Solicitation Package may be downloaded from the Bureau's Web site at *http://exchanges.state.gov/education/rfgps/menu.htm,* or from the Grants.gov Web site at *http://www.grants.gov.* Please read all information before downloading. IV.3. Content and Form of Submission: Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. The original and seven
(7)copies of the application should be sent per the instructions under IV.3e. “Application Deadline and Methods of Submissions” section below. IV.3a. You are required to have a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number to apply for a grant or cooperative agreement from the U.S. Government. This number is a nine-digit identification number, which uniquely identifies business entities. Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. To obtain a DUNS number, access *http://www.dunandbradstreet.com* or call 1-866-705-5711. Please ensure that your DUNS number is included in the appropriate box of the SF-424 which is part of the formal application package. IV.3b. All proposals must contain an executive summary, proposal narrative and budget. Please refer to the Solicitation Package. It contains the mandatory PSI and the POGI for additional formatting and technical requirements. IV.3c. You must have nonprofit status with the IRS at the time of application. If your organization is a private nonprofit which has not received a grant or cooperative agreement from ECA in the past three years, or if your organization received nonprofit status from the IRS within the past four years, you must submit the necessary documentation to verify nonprofit status as directed in the PSI document. Failure to do so will cause your proposal to be declared technically ineligible. IV.3d. Please take into consideration the following information when preparing your proposal narrative: IV.3d.1 Adherence to All Regulations Governing the J Visa. The Office of Citizen Exchanges of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs is the official program sponsor of the exchange program covered by this RFGP, and an employee of the Bureau will be the “Responsible Officer” for the program under the terms of 22 CFR part 62, which covers the administration of the Exchange Visitor Program (J visa program). Under the terms of 22 CFR part 62, organizations receiving grants under this RFGP will be third parties “cooperating with or assisting the sponsor in the conduct of the sponsor's program.” The actions of grantee program organizations shall be “imputed to the sponsor in evaluating the sponsor's compliance with” 22 CFR part 62. Therefore, the Bureau expects that any organization receiving a grant under this competition will render all assistance necessary to enable the Bureau to fully comply with 22 CFR part 62 *et seq.* The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs places critically important emphasis on the secure and proper administration of Exchange Visitor (J visa) Programs and adherence by grantee program organizations and program participants to all regulations governing the J visa program status. Therefore, proposals should explicitly state in writing that the applicant is prepared to assist the Bureau in meeting all requirements governing the administration of Exchange Visitor Programs as set forth in 22 CFR part 62. If your organization has experience as a designated Exchange Visitor Program Sponsor, the applicant should discuss their record of compliance with 22 CFR part 62 *et seq.,* including the oversight of their Responsible Officers and Alternate Responsible Officers, screening and selection of program participants, provision of pre-arrival information and orientation to participants, monitoring of participants, proper maintenance and security of forms, record-keeping, reporting and other requirements. The Office of Citizen Exchanges of ECA will be responsible for issuing DS-2019 forms to participants in this program. A copy of the complete regulations governing the administration of Exchange Visitor
(J)programs is available at *http://exchanges.state.gov* or from: United States Department of State, Office of Exchange Coordination and Designation, ECA/EC/ECD—SA-44, Room 734, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, Telephone:
(202)203-5029, FAX:
(202)453-8640. IV.3.d.2 Diversity, Freedom and Democracy Guidelines. Pursuant to the Bureau's authorizing legislation, programs must maintain a non-political character and should be balanced and representative of the diversity of American political, social, and cultural life. “Diversity” should be interpreted in the broadest sense and encompass differences including, but not limited to ethnicity, race, gender, religion, geographic location, socio-economic status, and disabilities. Applicants are strongly encouraged to adhere to the advancement of this principle both in program administration and in program content. Please refer to the review criteria under the “Support for Diversity” section for specific suggestions on incorporating diversity into your proposal. Public Law 104-319 provides that “in carrying out programs of educational and cultural exchange in countries whose people do not fully enjoy freedom and democracy,” the Bureau “shall take appropriate steps to provide opportunities for participation in such programs to human rights and democracy leaders of such countries.” Public Law 106-113 requires that the governments of the countries described above do not have inappropriate influence in the selection process. Proposals should reflect advancement of these goals in their program contents, to the full extent deemed feasible. IV.3d.3. Program Monitoring and Evaluation. Proposals must include a plan to monitor and evaluate the project's success, both as the activities unfold and at the end of the program. The Bureau recommends that your proposal include a draft survey questionnaire or other technique plus a description of a methodology to use to link outcomes to original project objectives. The Bureau expects that the grantee will track participants or partners and be able to respond to key evaluation questions, including satisfaction with the program, learning as a result of the program, changes in behavior as a result of the program, and effects of the program on institutions (institutions in which participants work or partner institutions). The evaluation plan should include indicators that measure gains in mutual understanding as well as substantive knowledge. Successful monitoring and evaluation depend heavily on setting clear goals and outcomes at the outset of a program. Your evaluation plan should include a description of your project's objectives, your anticipated project outcomes, and how and when you intend to measure these outcomes (performance indicators). The more that outcomes are “smart” (specific, measurable, attainable, results-oriented, and placed in a reasonable time frame), the easier it will be to conduct the evaluation. You should also show how your project objectives link to the goals of the program described in this RFGP. Your monitoring and evaluation plan should clearly distinguish between program outputs and outcomes. Outputs are products and services delivered, often stated as an amount. Output information is important to show the scope or size of project activities, but it cannot substitute for information about progress towards outcomes or the results achieved. Examples of outputs include the number of people trained or the number of seminars conducted. Outcomes, in contrast, represent specific results a project is intended to achieve and is usually measured as an extent of change. Findings on outputs and outcomes should both be reported, but the focus should be on outcomes. We encourage you to assess the following four levels of outcomes, as they relate to the program goals set out in the RFGP (listed here in increasing order of importance): 1. Participant satisfaction with the program and exchange experience. 2. Participant learning, such as increased knowledge, aptitude, skills, and changed understanding and attitude. Learning includes both substantive (subject-specific) learning and mutual understanding. 3. Participant behavior, concrete actions to apply knowledge in work or community; greater participation and responsibility in civic organizations; interpretation and explanation of experiences and new knowledge gained; continued contacts between participants, community members, and others. 4. Institutional changes, such as increased collaboration and partnerships, policy reforms, new programming, and organizational improvements. Please note: Consideration should be given to the appropriate timing of data collection for each level of outcome. For example, satisfaction is usually captured as a short-term outcome, whereas behavior and institutional changes are normally considered longer-term outcomes. Overall, the quality of your monitoring and evaluation plan will be judged on how well it
(1)specifies intended outcomes;
(2)gives clear descriptions of how each outcome will be measured;
(3)identifies when particular outcomes will be measured; and
(4)provides a clear description of the data collection strategies for each outcome ( *i.e.* , surveys, interviews, or focus groups). (Please note that evaluation plans that deal only with the first level of outcomes [satisfaction] will be deemed less competitive under the present evaluation criteria.) Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. IV.3e. Please take the following information into consideration when preparing your budget: IV.3e.1. ECA will provide two awards under this competition: $150,000 for Afghanistan and $200,000 for the West Bank. Applicants must submit a proposal and comprehensive budget for each program. There must be a summary budget as well as breakdowns reflecting both administrative and program budgets. Applicants may provide separate sub-budgets for each program component, phase, location, or activity to provide clarification. IV.3e.2. Allowable costs for the program and additional budget guidance are outlined in detail in the POGI document. Please refer to the Solicitation Package for complete budget guidelines and formatting instructions. IV.3f. Application Deadline and Methods of Submission: Application Deadline Date: February 8, 2008. Reference Number: ECA/PE/C/PY-08-13. Methods of Submission Applications may be submitted in one of two ways: Methods of Submission: Applications may be submitted in one of two ways: 1. In hard-copy, via a nationally recognized overnight delivery service (i.e., DHL, Federal Express, UPS, Airborne Express, or U.S. Postal Service Express Overnight Mail, etc.), or 2. electronically through *http://www.grants.gov.* Along with the Project Title, all applicants must enter the above Reference Number in Box 11 on the SF-424 contained in the mandatory PSI of the solicitation document. IV.3f.1 Submitting printed applications. Applications must be shipped no later than the above deadline. Delivery services used by applicants must have in-place, centralized shipping identification and tracking systems that may be accessed via the Internet and delivery people who are identifiable by commonly recognized uniforms and delivery vehicles. Proposals shipped on or before the above deadline but received at ECA more than seven days after the deadline will be ineligible for further consideration under this competition. Proposals shipped after the established deadlines are ineligible for consideration under this competition. ECA will not notify you upon receipt of application. It is each applicant's responsibility to ensure that each package is marked with a legible tracking number and to monitor/confirm delivery to ECA via the Internet. Delivery of proposal packages may not be made via local courier service or in person for this competition. Faxed documents will not be accepted at any time. Only proposals submitted as stated above will be considered. Important note: When preparing your submission please make sure to include one extra copy of the completed SF-424 form and place it in an envelope addressed to “ECA/EX/PM”. The original and eight
(8)copies of the application should be sent to: U.S. Department of State, SA-44, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Ref.: ECA/PE/C/PY-08-13, Program Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 534, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547. Applicants submitting hard-copy applications must also submit the “Executive Summary” and “Proposal Narrative” sections of the proposal in text (.txt) or Microsoft Word format on a PC-formatted disk. The Bureau will provide these files electronically to the Public Affairs Sections at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul or the Jerusalem Consulate General for review. IV.3f.2—Submitting electronic applications. Applicants have the option of submitting proposals electronically through Grants.gov ( *http://www.grants.gov* ). Complete solicitation packages are available at Grants.gov in the “Find” portion of the system. Please follow the instructions available in the ‘Get Started' portion of the site ( *http://www.grants.gov/GetStarted* ). Several of the steps in the Grants.gov registration process could take several weeks. Therefore, applicants should check with appropriate staff within their organizations immediately after reviewing this RFGP to confirm or determine their registration status with Grants.gov. Once registered, the amount of time it can take to upload an application will vary depending on a variety of factors including the size of the application and the speed of your internet connection. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you not wait until the application deadline to begin the submission process through *Grants.gov.* Direct all questions regarding Grants.gov registration and submission to: Grants.gov Customer Support, Contact Center Phone: 800-518-4726, Business Hours: Monday-Friday, 7 a.m.-9 p.m. Eastern Time, E-mail: *support@grants.gov.* Applicants have until midnight (12 a.m.), Washington, DC time of the closing date to ensure that their entire application has been uploaded to the Grants.gov site. There are no exceptions to the above deadline. Applications uploaded to the site after midnight of the application deadline date will be automatically rejected by the grants.gov system, and will be technically ineligible. Applicants will receive a confirmation e-mail from grants.gov upon the successful submission of an application. ECA will not notify you upon receipt of electronic applications. It is the responsibility of all applicants submitting proposals via the Grants.gov web portal to ensure that proposals have been received by Grants.gov in their entirety, and ECA bears no responsibility for data errors resulting from transmission or conversion processes. IV.3g. Intergovernmental Review of Applications: Executive Order 12372 does not apply to this program. V. Application Review Information V.1. Review Process The Bureau will review all proposals for technical eligibility. Proposals will be deemed ineligible if they do not fully adhere to the guidelines stated herein and in the Solicitation Package. All eligible proposals will be reviewed by the program office, as well as the Public Diplomacy section overseas, where appropriate. Eligible proposals will be subject to compliance with Federal and Bureau regulations and guidelines and forwarded to Bureau grant panels for advisory review. Proposals may also be reviewed by the Office of the Legal Adviser or by other Department elements. Final funding decisions are at the discretion of the Department of State's Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final technical authority for assistance awards (grants) resides with the Bureau's Grants Officer. Review Criteria 1. Program Planning/Ability To Achieve Program Objectives: Proposals should exhibit originality, substance, and relevance to the Bureau's mission. A detailed agenda and relevant work plan should explain how objectives will be achieved and should include a timetable for completion of major tasks. Reviewers will assess the degree in which proposals engage American and overseas participants in collaborative projects, including those that focus on foreign languages, civil society and American studies, including English. With respect to anticipated program outcomes, reviewers will assess the degree to which the proposed outcomes of the project are realistic and measurable. 2. Support of Diversity: Proposals should demonstrate substantive support of the Bureau's policy on diversity. Achievable and relevant features should be cited in both program administration (selection of participants, host families, schools, program venue and program evaluation) and program content (orientations, program meetings, resource materials and follow-up activities). 3. Organization's Record/Institutional Capacity: Reviewers will assess the applicant and its partners to determine if they offer adequate resources, expertise, and experience to fulfill program objectives. Applicants should demonstrate knowledge of each country's educational environment and the capacity to recruit and retain U.S. schools. Partner activities should be clearly defined. Proposals should demonstrate an institutional record of successful exchange programs, including responsible fiscal management and full compliance with all reporting and J-1 Visa requirements for past Bureau grants as determined by Bureau Grant Staff. The Bureau will consider the past performance of prior recipients and the demonstrated potential of new applicants. 4. Multiplier Effect: Proposed programs should strengthen long-term mutual understanding, including maximum sharing of information and establishment of institutional and individual linkages. Applicants should detail how participants will share newly -acquired knowledge and skills with others. 5. Project Monitoring and Evaluation: Proposals must include a plan to monitor the activity's success, both as the activities unfold and at the end of the program. The evaluation plan should show a clear link between program objectives and expected outcomes, and should include a description of performance indicators and measurement tools. Applicants should provide draft questionnaires or other techniques for use in surveying schools/participants to facilitate the demonstration of results. 6. Follow-On and Sustainability: Proposals should provide a strategy for the continuation of the schools' capacity to implement Internet access and online linkages without the Bureau's financial support. 7. Cost-effectiveness/Cost Sharing: Reviewers will analyze the budget for clarity and cost-effectiveness. They will also assess the rationale of the proposed budget and whether the allocation of funds is appropriate to complete tasks outlined in the project narrative. The overhead and administrative components of the proposal, including salaries and honoraria, should be kept as low as possible. All other items should be necessary and appropriate. Proposals should maximize cost-sharing through other private sector support as well as institutional direct funding contributions. Preference will be given to organizations whose proposals demonstrate a quality, cost-effective program. VI. Award Administration Information VI.1a. Award Notice: Final awards cannot be made until funds have been appropriated by Congress, allocated and committed through internal Bureau procedures. Successful applicants will receive an Assistance Award Document
(AAD)from the Bureau's Grants Office. The AAD and the original grant proposal with subsequent modifications (if applicable) shall be the only binding authorizing document between the recipient and the U.S. Government. The AAD will be signed by an authorized Grants Officer, and mailed to the recipient's responsible officer identified in the application. Unsuccessful applicants will receive notification of the results of the application review from the ECA program office coordinating this competition. VI.1b The following additional requirements apply to this project: For Assistance Awards involving the Palestinian Authority: All awards made under this competition must be executed according to all relevant laws and policies regarding assistance to the Palestinian Authority. Organizations should consult with relevant Public Affairs Offices before entering into any formal arrangements or agreements with Palestinian organizations or institutions. VI.2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: Terms and Conditions for the Administration of ECA agreements include the following: Office of Management and Budget Circular A-122, “Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations.” Office of Management and Budget Circular A-21, “Cost Principles for Educational Institutions.” OMB Circular A-87, “Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Governments”. OMB Circular No. A-110 (Revised), Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Nonprofit Organizations. OMB Circular No. A-102, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants-in-Aid to State and Local Governments. OMB Circular No. A-133, Audits of States, Local Government, and Non-profit Organizations. Please reference the following websites for additional information: *http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants* . *http://exchanges.state.gov/education/grantsdiv/terms.htm#articleI* . VI.3. Reporting Requirements: You must provide ECA with a hard copy original plus one copy of the following reports: 1. A final program and financial report no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award; 2. One interim program report 3. Financial reports 4. Quarterly newsletters that highlight program activities and successes are strongly recommended. Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. (Please refer to IV. Application and Submission Instructions (IV.3.d.3) above for Program Monitoring and Evaluation information. All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. All reports must be sent to the ECA Grants Officer and ECA Program Officer listed in the final assistance award document. VI.4. Program Data Requirements: Organizations awarded grants will be required to maintain specific data on program participants and activities in an electronically accessible database format that can be shared with the Bureau as required. VII. Agency Contacts For questions about this announcement, contact: Anna Mussman, Office of Citizen Exchanges, ECA/PE/C/PY, Room 568, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547. Telephone:
(202)203-7506 Fax number:
(202)203-7529, Internet address: *MussmanAP@state.gov* . All correspondence with the Bureau concerning this RFGP should reference the above title and number ECA/PE/C/PY-08-13. Please read the complete **Federal Register** announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. VIII. Other Information Notice: The terms and conditions published in this RFGP are binding and may not be modified by any Bureau representative. Explanatory information provided by the Bureau that contradicts published language will not be binding. Issuance of the RFGP does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government. The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and the availability of funds. Awards made will be subject to periodic reporting and evaluation requirements per section VI.3 above. Dated: December 5, 2007. C. Miller Crouch, Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affair, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-24188 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Fifth Meeting, Special Committee 215 Aeronautical Mobile Satellite (Route) Services Next Generation Satellite Services and Equipment AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 215, Aeronautical Mobile Satellite (Route) Services, Next Generation Satellite Services and Equipment. SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a second meeting of RTCA Special Committee 215, Aeronautical Mobile Satellite (Route) Services, Next Generation Satellite Services and Equipment. DATES: The meeting will be held January 22-23, 2007, at 9 a.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Continental Airlines, 600 Jefferson Street, Concourse Level—Training Room C, Houston, TX 77002. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036; telephone
(202)833-9339; fax
(202)833-9434; Web site *http://www.rtca.org* for directions. POC: Mr. David Pitoniak, Phone: 713-324-3907. *Note:* Dress is Business Casual. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is hereby given for a Special Committee 215 meeting. The agenda will include: • January 22: • Opening Plenary Session (Welcome, Introductions, and Administrative Remarks, Review and Approval of Agenda for Fifth Plenary. • Review and Approval of Fourth Meeting Summary (215-045; RTCA Paper No. 295-07/SC215-011). • Review of Action List Outstanding Actions. • DO-262 Normative Appendix. • Report from DO-262 Working Groups. • Review and Discussion of Remaining Sections. • DO-270—Normative Appendix. • Overview of Approach for Normative Appendix. • Review of DO-270 Normative Appendix. • Closing Plenary Session (Other Business, Schedule Next Plenary Meeting, Adjourn—Wednesday, January 23, 2007; 12 noon). Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may present a written statement to the committee at any time. Issued in Washington, DC, on January 7, 2007. **Editoral Note:** This document was received at the Office of the Federal Register December 7, 2007. Robert L. Bostiga, RTCA Advisory Committee (Acting). [FR Doc. 07-6037 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 42
Traces to 42 documents
U.S. Code
CFR
17 references not yet in our index
  • 43 CFR 2740
  • 29 CFR 2550.408
  • 29 CFR 2570
  • 55 FR 32836
  • 45 CFR 614
  • 10 CFR 70
  • 49 CFR 1572
  • 27 CFR 555
  • 42 CFR 73
  • 15 USC 80b
  • 17 CFR 240.19
  • 17 CFR 19
  • Pub. L. 87-256
  • 22 CFR 62
  • Pub. L. 104-319
  • Pub. L. 106-113
  • Pub. L. 92-463
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of Public Meetings
U.S.C.§ 315f
Fed. Reg.Rules and Regulations
U.S.C.§ 869
U.S.C.§ 945
U.S.C.§ 1761
U.S.C.§ 185
Stat.Public Law 91–190
U.S.C.§ 4332
U.S.C.§ 1671d
Cite43 CFR 2740
Cite29 CFR 2550.408
Cite29 CFR 2570
Cites 59 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.