Notices. 30-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Re-instatement and revision of existing collection, Prison Population Reports: Midyear Population Counts and Summary of Sentenced Population Movement—National Prisoner Statistics

24,573 words·~112 min read·/register/2008/02/13/08-676

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

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Office of Justice Programs [OMB Number 1121-0102] Agency Information Collection Activities: Existing Collection; Comment Requested ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Re-instatement and revision of existing collection, Prison Population Reports: Midyear Population Counts and Summary of Sentenced Population Movement—National Prisoner Statistics. The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs, will be submitting the following information collection to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was published in the **Federal Register** Volume 72, Number 234, page 68900-68901 on December 6, 2007, allowing for a 60 day public comment period. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comments until March 14, 2008. This process is in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice, especially the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to The Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503. Additionally, comments may be submitted to OMB via fascimile to

(202)395-7285. Request written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following points:

(1)Evaluate whether the proposed collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3)Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses. Overview of this information collection:

(1)*Type of Information Collection:* Re-instatement and minor revision.

(2)*Title of the Form/Collection:* Prison Population Reports Midyear Counts; and Summary of Sentenced Population Movement—National Prisoner Statistics

(3)*Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Justice sponsoring the collection: Form number:* NPS-1A; and NPS-1B. Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.

(4)*Affected public who will be asked to respond, as well as a brief abstract:* *Primary:* State Departments of Corrections. *Others:* The Federal Bureau of Prisons. For the NPS-1A form, 51 central reporters (one from each State and the Federal Bureau of Prisons) responsible for keeping records on inmates will be asked to provide information for the following categories:

(a)As of June 30, the number of male and female inmates under their jurisdiction with maximum sentences of more than one year, one year or less; and unsentenced inmates; and

(b)The number of male and female inmates in their custody with maximum sentences of more than one year, one year or less; and unsentenced inmates; and

(c)The number of male and female inmates under their jurisdiction housed in privately-operated facility, either in state or out of state;

(d)The number of male and females inmates in their custody by race and Hispanic origin;

(e)The number of male and female inmates under the age of 18 held in their system; and

(f)The number of male and female noncitizen inmates held in their system. For the NPS-1B form, 51 central reporters (one from each and the Federal Bureau of Prisons) responsible for keeping records on inmates will be asked to provide information for the following categories:

(a)As of December 31, the number of male and female inmates within their custody and under their jurisdiction with maximum sentences of more than one year, one year or less; and unsentenced inmates;

(b)The number of inmates housed in privately operated facilities, county or other local authority correctional facilities, or in other state or Federal facilities on December 31;

(c)Prison admission information in the calendar year for the following categories: new court commitments, parole violators, other conditional release violators returned, transfers from other jurisdictions, AWOLs and escapees returned, and returns from appeal and bond;

(d)Prison release information in the calendar year for the following categories: expirations of sentence, commutations, other conditional releases, probations, supervised mandatory releases, paroles, other conditional releases, deaths by cause, AWOLs, escapes, transfers to other jurisdictions, and releases to appeal or bond;

(e)Number of inmates under jurisdiction on December 31 by race and Hispanic origin;

(f)Testing of incoming inmates for HIV; and HIV infection and AIDS cases on December 31; and

(g)The aggregate rated, operational, and design capacities, by sex, of each State's correctional facilities at year-end. The Bureau of Justice Statistics uses this information in published reports and for the U.S. Congress, Executive Office of the President, practitioners, researchers, students, the media, and others interested in criminal justice statistics.

(5)An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time needed for an average respondent to respond to both forms: 51 respondents each taking an average 8.0 total hours to respond (1.5 hours for the NPS-1A and 6.5 hours for the NPS-1B). Burden hours are up by 255 hours under this clearance because we are adding the elements from the NPS-1 form (approved under OMB number 1121-0078), with 51 respondents each taking an estimated 6 hours to complete. However, we are also eliminating the previous NPS-1B form due to redundancy, 51 respondents at 1.5 hours each, thus reducing the overall burden of the NPS series by 76.5 hours.

(6)An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 408 annual burden hours. If additional information is required, contact: Ms. Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning staff, Patrick Henry Building, Suite 1600, 601 D Street, NW., Washington, DC 20530 Dated: February 7, 2008. Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, PRA, United States Department of Justice. [FR Doc. E8-2599 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-18-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-61,318] Epic Technologies, LLC. Including On-Site Leased Workers of Superior Technical Resources and Spherion, Johnson City Division, Johnson City, TN; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on May 14, 2007, applicable to workers of Epic Technologies, LLC., including on-site leased workers of Superior Technical Resources, Johnson City Division, Johnson City, Tennessee. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on May 30, 2007 (72 FR 30033). At the request of a company official, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged in the production of assembled printed circuit boards. New information shows that leased workers of Spherion were employed on-site at the Johnson City, Tennessee location of Epic Technologies, LLC., Johnson City Division. The Department has determined that these workers were sufficiently under the control of Epic Technologies, LLC., Johnson City Division to be considered leased workers. Based on these findings, the Department is amending this certification to include leased workers of Spherion working on-site at the Johnson City, Tennessee location of the subject firm. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers employed at Epic Technologies, LLC., Johnson City Division, Johnson City, Tennessee who were adversely impacted by a shift in production of assembled printed circuit boards to Mexico. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-61,318 is hereby issued as follows: All workers of Epic Technologies, LLC., including on-site leased workers from Superior Technical Resources, and Spherion, Johnson City Division, Johnson City, Tennessee, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after April 16, 2006, through May 14, 2009, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC this 1st day of February 2008. Richard Church, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-2621 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-59,362; TA-W-59,362A; TA-W-59,362B] Mount Vernon Mills, Inc., Trion Denim Mill Division, Trion, GA; Including Employees of Mount Vernon Mills, Inc. Trion Denim Mill Division, Trion, GA Located in: Verona, NJ, Riedsville, NC; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on May 31, 2006, applicable to workers of Mount Vernon Mills, Inc., Trion Denim Mill Division, Trion, Georgia. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on June 22, 2006 (71 FR 35949). At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. New information shows that worker separations have occurred involving employees of the Trion, Georgia facility of Mount Vernon Mills, Inc., Trion Denim Mill Division Group, Inc. located in Verona, New Jersey and Riedsville, North Carolina. Ms. Jennifer Finn and Mr. Michael White provided sales and product development functions supporting the production of denim cloth that is produced at the Trion, Georgia location of the subject firm. Based on these findings, the Department is amending this certification to include employees of the Trion, Georgia facility of Mount Vernon Mills, Inc., Trion Denim Mill Division working out of Verona, New Jersey and Riedsville, North Carolina. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of Mount Vernon Mills, Inc., Trion Denim Mill Division, Trion, Georgia who were adversely affected by increased customer imports. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-59,362 is hereby issued as follows: All workers of Mount Vernon Mills, Inc., Trion Denim Mill Division, Trion, Georgia (TA-W-59,362), including employees of Mount Vernon Mills, Inc., Trion Denim Mill Division, Trion, Georgia located in Verona, New Jersey (TA-W-59,362A) and Riedsville, North Carolina (TA-W-59,362B), who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after May 9, 2005, through May 31, 2008, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC this 4th day of February 2008. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-2620 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-58,623L; TA-W-58,623GG] WestPoint Home, Inc., Formerly WestPoint Stevens, Inc., Sales and Marketing Office, New York, NY; Including an Employee of WestPoint Home, Inc., Formerly WestPoint Stevens, Inc., Sales and Marketing Office, New York, NY, Working at the Following Location; Seneca, SC; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Notice of Determination Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on February 21, 2006, applicable to workers of WestPoint Home, Inc., formerly WestPoint Stevens, Inc., Sales and Marketing Office, New York, New York. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on March 22, 2006 (71 FR 14549). At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. New information shows that a worker separation has occurred involving an employee of the Sales and Marketing Office, New York, New York of WestPoint Home, Inc., formerly WestPoint Stevens, Inc. located in Seneca, South Carolina. Mr. Gerry Bednar provided various support services for the manufacture of comforters, sheets, pillowcases, towels and blankets produced by WestPoint Home, Inc., formerly WestPoint Stevens, Inc. Based on these findings, the Department is amending this certification to include an employee of the Sales and Marketing Office New York, New York facility of WestPoint Home, Inc., formerly WestPoint Stevens, Inc. located in Seneca, South Carolina. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of WestPoint Home, Inc., formerly WestPoint Stevens, Inc., Sales and Marketing Office, New York, New York who were adversely affected by increased company and customer imports. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-58,623L is hereby issued as follows: All workers of WestPoint Home, Inc., formerly WestPoint Stevens, Inc., Sales and Marketing Office, New York, New York (TA-W-58,623L), including an employee reporting to this office but working in Seneca, South Carolina (TA-W-58,623GG), who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after January 12, 2005, through February 21, 2008, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC this 5th day of February 2008. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-2619 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Notice of Determinations Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor herein presents summaries of determinations regarding eligibility to apply for trade adjustment assistance for workers (TA-W) number and alternative trade adjustment assistance

(ATAA)by (TA-W) number issued during the period of *January 28 through February 1, 2008.* In order for an affirmative determination to be made for workers of a primary firm and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance, each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(a) of the Act must be met. I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following must be satisfied: A. A significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated; B. The sales or production, or both, of such firm or subdivision have decreased absolutely; and C. Increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have contributed importantly to such workers' separation or threat of separation and to the decline in sales or production of such firm or subdivision; or II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the following must be satisfied: A. A significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated; B. There has been a shift in production by such workers' firm or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or directly competitive with articles which are produced by such firm or subdivision; and C. One of the following must be satisfied: 1. The country to which the workers' firm has shifted production of the articles is a party to a free trade agreement with the United States; 2. The country to which the workers' firm has shifted production of the articles is a beneficiary country under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act; or 3. There has been or is likely to be an increase in imports of articles that are like or directly competitive with articles which are or were produced by such firm or subdivision. Also, in order for an affirmative determination to be made for secondarily affected workers of a firm and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance, each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(b) of the Act must be met.

(1)Significant number or proportion of the workers in the workers' firm or an appropriate subdivision of the firm have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated;

(2)The workers' firm (or subdivision) is a supplier or downstream producer to a firm (or subdivision) that employed a group of workers who received a certification of eligibility to apply for trade adjustment assistance benefits and such supply or production is related to the article that was the basis for such certification; and

(3)Either—

(A)The workers' firm is a supplier and the component parts it supplied for the firm (or subdivision) described in paragraph

(2)accounted for at least 20 percent of the production or sales of the workers' firm; or

(B)A loss of business by the workers' firm with the firm (or subdivision) described in paragraph

(2)contributed importantly to the workers' separation or threat of separation. In order for the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

(ATAA)for older workers, the group eligibility requirements of Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act must be met. 1. Whether a significant number of workers in the workers' firm are 50 years of age or older. 2. Whether the workers in the workers' firm possess skills that are not easily transferable. 3. The competitive conditions within the workers' industry (i.e., conditions within the industry are adverse). Affirmative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance The following certifications have been issued. The date following the company name and location of each determination references the impact date for all workers of such determination. The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(A) (increased imports) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(B) (shift in production) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (supplier to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (downstream producer for a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA based on increased imports from or a shift in production to Mexico or Canada) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* Affirmative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance The following certifications have been issued. The date following the company name and location of each determination references the impact date for all workers of such determination. The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(A) (increased imports) and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-62,476; Elixir Industries, Division 34, Crossville, TN: November 9, 2006.* *TA-W-62,523; Wolverine Tube, Inc., On-Site Workers From Lyons HR, Decatur, AL: November 30, 2006.* *TA-W-62,523A; Wolverine Tube, Inc., Booneville, MS: November 30, 2006.* *TA-W-62,523B; Wolverine Tube, Inc., Huntsville, AL: November 30, 2006.* *TA-W-62,642; North State Industries, Inc., Nevis, MN: January 4, 2007.* *TA-W-62,530; Cooper Standard Automotive, Fluids Division, New Lexington, OH: November 27, 2006.* *TA-W-62,559; Hyde Tools, Inc., Southbridge, MA: December 10, 2006.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(B) (shift in production) and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-62,473; Pfizer, Inc., Global Manufacturing Division, Groton, CT: November 15, 2006.* *TA-W-62,572; Ethicon, A Johnson and Johnson Company, San Angelo, TX: June 9, 2007.* *TA-W-62,629; Giant Merchandising, Inc., Priority Temp. Services, Partners & Apple One, Commerce, CA: December 10, 2006.* *TA-W-62,615; Idearc Media, Valley Forge Ad Production, On-Site Leased Workers of Tac Worldwide, Norristown, PA: December 28, 2006.* *TA-W-62,709; ITT Corporation, Koni Friction Prod. Div., Staffmark & Ambassador, Searcy, AR: January 18, 2007.* *TA-W-62,736; Meade Instruments Corporation, Leased Workers of the Quest Staffing and Select Remedy, Irvine, CA: January 24, 2007.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (supplier to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA) and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (downstream producer for a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA based on increased imports from or a shift in production to Mexico or Canada) and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* Negative Determinations for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In the following cases, it has been determined that the requirements of 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) have not been met for the reasons specified. The Department has determined that criterion

(1)of Section 246 has not been met. The firm does not have a significant number of workers 50 years of age or older. *None.* The Department has determined that criterion

(2)of Section 246 has not been met. Workers at the firm possess skills that are easily transferable. *None.* The Department has determined that criterion

(3)of Section 246 has not been met. Competition conditions within the workers' industry are not adverse. *None.* Negative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In the following cases, the investigation revealed that the eligibility criteria for worker adjustment assistance have not been met for the reasons specified. Because the workers of the firm are not eligible to apply for TAA, the workers cannot be certified eligible for ATAA. The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.A.) and (a)(2)(B)(II.A.) (employment decline) have not been met. *TA-W-62,317; Kemira Chemicals, Washougal, WA.* The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.B.) (Sales or production, or both, did not decline) and (a)(2)(B)(II.B.) (shift in production to a foreign country) have not been met. *TA-W-62,607; Chrysler LLC, Belvidere Assembly Plant, Belvidere, IL.* The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C.) (increased imports) and (a)(2)(B)(II.B.) (shift in production to a foreign country) have not been met. *TA-W-62,170; United Machine Works, Inc., Greenville, NC.* *TA-W-62,618; Allflex-Boulder, Boulder, Co.* *TA-W-62,630; Llink Technologies, LLC, Brown City, MI.* *TA-W-62,614; Weyerhauser Green Mountain Lumber Mill, Toutle, WA.* The workers' firm does not produce an article as required for certification under Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974. *TA-W-62,258; Chemtura Corporation, Corporate Headquarters, Middlebury, CT.* *TA-W-62,550; Nelson Staffing, Working of Site at Oracle Corp. Global Financial Services Dept. Redwood, Redwood Shore, CA.* The investigation revealed that criteria of Section 222(b)(2) has not been met. The workers' firm (or subdivision) is not a supplier to or a downstream producer for a firm whose workers were certified eligible to apply for TAA. *None.* I hereby certify that the aforementioned determinations were issued during the period of *January 28 through February 1, 2008.* Copies of these determinations are available for inspection in Room C-5311, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210 during normal business hours or will be mailed to persons who write to the above address. Dated: February 7, 2008. Ralph DiBattista, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-2618 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Investigations Regarding Certifications of Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance Petitions have been filed with the Secretary of Labor under Section 221

(a)of the Trade Act of 1974 (“the Act”) and are identified in the Appendix to this notice. Upon receipt of these petitions, the Director of the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, has instituted investigations pursuant to Section 221

(a)of the Act. The purpose of each of the investigations is to determine whether the workers are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Title II, Chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations will further relate, as appropriate, to the determination of the date on which total or partial separations began or threatened to begin and the subdivision of the firm involved. The petitioners or any other persons showing a substantial interest in the subject matter of the investigations may request a public hearing, provided such request is filed in writing with the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than February 25, 2008. Interested persons are invited to submit written comments regarding the subject matter of the investigations to the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than February 25, 2008. The petitions filed in this case are available for inspection at the Office of the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room C-5311, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of February 2008. Ralph DiBattista, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. APPENDIX [TAA petitions instituted between 1/28/08 and 2/1/08] TA-W Subject Firm (petitioners) Location Date of institution Date of petition 62746 Reed and Barton Corporation

(Comp)Taunton, MA 01/28/08 01/25/08 62747 Thomas Brothers Maps and Rand McNally Company (State) Irvine, CA 01/28/08 01/25/08 62748 Panasonic Primary Battery Corporation of America

(Comp)Columbus, GA 01/28/08 01/25/08 62749 Industrial Wire Products

(Wkrs)Sullivan, MO 01/28/08 01/23/08 62750 Carson's of High Point

(Wkrs)Archdale, NC 01/28/08 01/16/08 62751 Saco Lowell Parts, LLC

(Comp)Easley, SC 01/28/08 01/11/08 62752 DynAmerica Manufacturing, LLC

(Wkrs)Muncie, IN 01/28/08 01/26/08 62753 Aerotek (State) Flint, MI 01/29/08 01/28/08 62754 Silicon Laboratories, Inc.

(Wkrs)Austin, TX 01/29/08 01/28/08 62755 Geiger Manufactured Products Group

(Comp)Lewiston, ME 01/29/08 01/17/08 62756 Wacco Scaffolding and Equipment

(Comp)Cleveland, OH 01/29/08 01/28/08 62757 Meadowcraft, Inc.

(Comp)Birmingham, AL 01/29/08 01/28/08 62758 Parker International Products, Inc.

(Comp)Worcester, MA 01/29/08 01/16/08 62759 Inverness Corporation

(Wkrs)Fairlawn, NJ 01/29/08 01/28/08 62760 Delphi Automotive Systems

(Wkrs)Kokomo, IN 01/29/08 01/28/08 62761 TI Automotive (Plant #27)

(Comp)Marysville, MI 01/29/08 01/28/08 62762 Pembrook Chair Corporation, Inc.

(Wkrs)Claremont, NC 01/29/08 01/25/08 62763 Ruerson/Briteline

(Wkrs)Chicago, IL 01/30/08 01/28/08 62764 Pineer Manufacturing Company, Inc.

(Wkrs)Rillton, PA 01/30/08 01/29/08 62765 Unisys

(Comp)Plymouth, MI 01/30/08 01/29/08 62766 School Apparel, Inc. (State) Star City, AR 01/30/08 01/29/08 62767 Masterbrand Cabinets

(Comp)Crossville, TN 01/30/08 01/29/08 62768 North Barre Granite, Inc.

(Comp)Barre, VT 01/30/08 01/21/08 62769 Nemak USA, Inc.

(Wkrs)Dickson, TN 01/30/08 01/12/08 62770 Diamond Tool and Die Company

(Wkrs)Dayton, OH 01/30/08 01/24/08 62771 Parlex USA

(Wkrs)Methuen, MA 01/30/08 01/29/08 62772 Ramtex Yarns and Fabrics, LLC

(Comp)Ramseur, NC 01/30/08 01/29/08 62773 Computer Sciences Corporation

(Wkrs)San Diego, CA 01/30/08 01/28/08 62774 Agfa Corporation

(Comp)Wilmington, MA 01/31/08 01/30/08 62775 American Standard (Union) Tiffin, OH 01/31/08 01/30/08 62776 Tree Top, Inc

(IBT)Cashmere, WA 01/31/08 01/29/08 62777 Brunswick Bowling and Billiards (IAMAW) Antigo, WI 01/31/08 01/30/08 62778 Lear Corporation (Union) Fenton, MI 01/31/08 01/30/08 62779 Visteon Concordia

(UAW)Concordia, MO 01/31/08 01/29/08 62780 Xantrex Technology, Inc.

(Comp)Arlington, WA 01/31/08 01/30/08 62781 Dillan Chenille, Inc.

(Comp)Martinsville, VA 01/31/08 01/29/08 62782 Quality Services, Inc.

(Comp)Lordstown, OH 01/31/08 01/30/08 62783 Kemet Electronics Corporation, Fountain Inn, SC

(Comp)Fountain Inn, SC 02/01/08 01/25/08 62784 Kemet Electronics Corp., Simpsonville, SC

(Comp)Simpsonville, SC 02/01/08 01/25/08 62785 Sappi Fine Paper

(Comp)Allentown, PA 02/01/08 02/01/08 62786 Springs Global U.S. , Inc.

(Rep)Lancaster, SC 02/01/08 01/31/08 62787 Hasbro, Inc./Milton Bradley

(Comp)East Longmeadow, MA 02/01/08 01/30/08 62788 Amity/Rolfs, Inc.

(Wkrs)West Bend, WI 02/01/08 01/31/08 62789 Bollman Hat Company

(Comp)Adamstown, Pa 02/01/08 01/31/08 62790 Donaldson Company, Inc. (State) Grinnell, IA 02/01/08 01/31/08 62791 Jacquart Fabric Products, Inc.

(Comp)Ironwood, MI 02/01/08 01/31/08 62792 Erisco Industries, Inc.

(Wkrs)Erie, PA 02/01/08 01/30/08 [FR Doc. E8-2617 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-62,184; TA-W-62,184A] Mark Eyelet, Inc., Including On-Site Leased Workers of Jaci Carroll Staffing, Watertown, CT; Ozzi II, Inc., (DBA OC Eyelet), Including On-Site Leased Workers of Watertown, CT; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration On January 7, 2007, the Department issued an Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers and former workers of the subject firm. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on January 16, 2008 (73 FR 2941). The initial investigation resulted in a negative determination based on the finding that imports of eyelet parts and miniature stamping did not contribute importantly to worker separations at the subject firm and no shift of production to a foreign source occurred. The company official of the subject firm filed a request for reconsideration and provided a list of customers which allegedly are importing products. On reconsideration the Department of Labor surveyed these declining customers regarding their purchases of like or directly competitive products with eyelet parts and miniature stampings purchased from the subject firm in 2005, 2006, and during January through September 2007 over the corresponding 2006 period. The survey revealed that the customers did not import eyelet parts and miniature stampings during the relevant period. The petitioner also stated that the subject firm did not shift production of eyelet parts and miniature stamping abroad, but the customers of the subject firm shifted production of automotive and electronic parts production to China, thus negatively impacting production at the subject firm. The fact that subject firm's customers are shifting their production abroad is not relevant to this investigation. According to section (a)(2)(B) of the Trade Act, in order to be eligible for TAA on the basis of a shift in production abroad, the shift in production must be implemented by the subject firm or its subdivision. In this case, the subject firm did not import eyelet parts and miniature stampings nor was there a shift in production from subject firm abroad during the relevant period. Conclusion After reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of negative determination of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance for workers and former workers of Mark Eyelet, Inc., including on-site leased workers of Jaci Carroll Staffing Watertown, Connecticut (TA-W-62,184) and Ozzi II, Inc., (dba OC Eyelet), including on-site leased workers of Jaci Carroll Staffing, Watertown, Connecticut (TA-W-62,184A). Signed at Washington, DC this 6th day of February, 2008. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-2622 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-62,507] Chester Bednar Rental Realty, Washington, PA; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration On January 8, 2008, the Department issued an Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers and former workers of the subject firm. The Department's Notice of determination was published in the **Federal Register** on January 16, 2008 (73 FR 2941). The initial negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance

(TAA)and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

(ATAA)applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm was based on the Department's findings that the subject firm did not separate or threaten to separate from employment a significant number or proportion of workers as required by Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974. The request for reconsideration implied that the subject firm had separated more than three employees from employment. During the reconsideration investigation, the Department requested that the company official provide documentation that the subject firm had separated or threaten to separate from employment a significant number or proportion of workers. Based on the company official's response, the Department affirms that the subject firm did not separate or threaten to separate from employment a significant number or proportion of workers. The Department finds that Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974 was not satisfied and that the group eligibility criteria for TAA certification were not met. In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA), the subject worker group must be certified eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA). Since the subject workers are denied eligibility to apply for TAA, the workers cannot be certified eligible for ATAA. Conclusion After careful reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of negative determination of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance for workers and former workers of Chester Bednar Rental Realty, Washington, Pennsylvania. Signed at Washington, DC this 6th day of February 2008. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-2616 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Occupational Safety and Health Administration [Docket No. OSHA-2007-0088] Requests Nominations for Employer, Employee and Public Representatives To Serve on the Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), U.S. Department of Labor. ACTION: OSHA requests nominations for employer, employee and public representatives to serve on the Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH). SUMMARY: The Secretary of Labor invites interested parties to submit nominations, and materials in support of nominations, for membership on ACCSH. DATES: Nominations for ACCSH must be submitted (postmarked, sent or received) by March 14, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit nominations and supporting materials for ACCSH, identified with the agency name, OSHA, and the Docket No. OSHA-2007-0088 by any of the following methods: *Electronically:* You may make electronic submissions at *http://www.regulations.gov,* which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions on-line for submitting comments. *Facsimile:* If the nomination, including supporting materials, is not longer than 10 pages, you may fax it to the OSHA Docket Office at

(202)693-1648. *Mail, express delivery, hand delivery, messenger or courier service:* If you want to submit a nomination or supporting materials, in hard copy, you must send three copies to the OSHA Docket Office, Room N-2625, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone

(202)693-2350 (OSHA's TTY number is

(877)889-5627). The deliveries will be accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket Office's normal business hours, 8:15 a.m.-4:45 p.m., e.t. *Submission requirements, instructions, and cautions:* See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. *Assistance with on-line submissions and docket access:* User Tips— *http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main;* or OSHA Docket Office, telephone

(202)693-2350 (OSHA's TTY number is

(877)889-5627). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael M.X. Buchet, OSHA, Directorate of Construction-Office of Construction Services, Room N-3468, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. 20210; telephone 202-693-2020; e-mail address *buchet.michael@dol.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health invites interested parties to submit nominations and materials in support of nominations for membership on ACCSH to OSHA. *Background:* ACCSH is a continuing advisory committee established under Section 107(e) of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 3704(d)(4)), which is required to advise the Secretary in formulating construction safety and health standards and other regulations, as well as on policy matters arising in carrying out these requirements. In addition, 29 CFR 1912.3(a) provides that the Assistant Secretary shall consult ACCSH whenever the Agency proposes occupational safety or health standards for construction activities. As originally constituted ACCSH had nine members, three each representing: contractors, primarily building trade employees, and the public, appointed by the Secretary of Labor. Section 29 CFR 1912.3(c) explains that pursuant to Section 105 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 3706) it had been found necessary and proper in the public interest and in order to prevent possible injustice to conform ACCSH's composition to that of Occupational Safety and Health Act Section 7(b) (29 U.S.C. 656) advisory committees and to increase its membership to 15 members. Under 29 CFR 1912.3(b), the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health appoints fifteen members to ACCSH. One of the members is appointed to chair the committee. ACCSH operates in compliance with the provisions of the Construction Safety Act, section 7 of the OSH Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2), and regulations issued pursuant to those statutes (29 CFR 1912, 41 CFR part 101-6 and 102-3). ACCSH meets two to four times per year for one or two days per meeting. *ACCSH Membership:* ACCSH members appointed by the Assistant Secretary serve staggered two-year terms. The categories of ACCSH membership including the number of new members to be appointed in conjunction with this notice are as follows: • Five members who are qualified by experience and affiliation to present the viewpoint of employers in the construction industry: Three employer representatives will be appointed. • Five members who are similarly qualified to present the viewpoint of employees in the construction industry: Three employee representatives will be appointed. • Two representatives of State safety and health agencies: None will be appointed; the current representatives' terms expire in November 2009. • Two public members, qualified by knowledge and experience to make a useful contribution to the work of ACCSH, such as those who have professional or technical experience and competence with occupational safety and health in the construction industry: One public representative will be appointed. • One representative designated by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH): The HHS representative serves an indefinite term. The current HHS designated representative from NIOSH will continue to serve indefinitely. ACCSH members serve two-year terms, unless they resign, become unable to serve, cease to be qualified to serve, or are removed by the Secretary [29 CFR 1912.3(e)]. However, an ACCSH member whose term has expired may continue to serve until a successor is appointed. ACCSH members may serve successive terms as long as they remain otherwise qualified. Any member absent from two consecutive meetings may be removed or replaced. The Department of Labor is committed to equal opportunity in the workplace and seeks broad-based and diverse ACCSH membership. Nominations for a specific category of ACCSH membership should come from groups or people within the category. Others are invited and encouraged to submit endorsements in support of particular nominees. *Submission requirements:* Nominations must include the following information:

(1)Nominee's resume or curriculum vitae, including prior membership on ACCSH or with other relevant organizations or associations;

(2)Categories of membership (employer, employee, public) for which the nominee can serve;

(3)A summary of background, experience and qualifications that addresses the nominee's suitability for each of the nominated membership categories;

(4)Articles or other documents the nominee has authored that indicate his or her knowledge, experience and expertise in occupational safety and health, particularly as it pertains to the construction industry;

(5)The nominee's contact information (address, phone, e-mail); and

(6)A written commitment from the nominee of his or her willingness to attend meetings regularly and participate in good faith, and a statement that the nominee has no apparent conflicts of interest that would preclude unbiased service on ACCSH. *Submission instructions and cautions:* All nominations, supporting documents, attachments and other materials must identify the Agency name, OSHA, and include the Docket No. OSHA-2007-0088. You may submit all materials in the following ways:

(1)Electronically at *http://www.regulations.gov,* which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal by following on-line instructions; or

(2)by facsimile

(FAX)to the OSHA Docket Office at

(202)693-1648 or

(3)by sending three

(3)hard copies to the OSHA Docket Office, Room N-2625, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone

(202)693-2350 (OSHA's TTY number is

(877)889-5627). You may supplement electronic submissions by attaching uploaded electronic document files. Alternatively, you may supplement electronic submissions with hard copy documents delivered by U.S. Mail, express delivery, hand delivery, messenger or courier service to OSHA Docket Office. Hard copy supplemental materials must be submitted in triplicate. All the materials must clearly identify your electronic nomination by Agency, OSHA, nominee name, date, and Docket No. OSHA-2007-0088 so that the new materials can be attached to the correct nomination packet. All submissions in response to this **Federal Register** notice are listed in the *http://www.regulations.gov* index; however, some information ( *e.g.* , copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download on-line. All submissions, including materials not available on-line ( *e.g.* copyrighted material), are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office (See ADDRESSES section.). All submissions, including personal information provided, will be posted without change. Because all materials are available to the public either on-line or through the OSHA Docket Office, OSHA cautions interested parties about submitting personal information such as social security numbers and dates of birth. Materials submitted using U.S. Postal Service mail may experience significant delays because of security-related procedures. For information about security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand, express delivery, messenger or courier service, please contact the OSHA Docket Office at

(202)693-2350 (TTY

(877)889-5627). *Assistance with on-line submissions and with docket access:* Guidance for submitting nominations and materials in support of nominations is available on-line at the *http://www.regulations.gov* Web site User Tips link and by telephone,

(202)693-2350, (TTY,

(877)889-5627) at the OSHA Docket Office. Similar information, about on-line access to Docket No. OSHA-2007-0088 and about access to materials not available on-line, can be found at the same two sources. *Member Selection:* In addition to other relevant sources of information, the information received through this nomination process will assist the Assistant Secretary in making appointments to ACCSH. In selecting ACCSH members, the Assistant Secretary will consider individuals nominated in response to this **Federal Register** notice, as well as other qualified individuals. OSHA will publish the new ACCSH membership list in the **Federal Register** . Federal Register *Access:* Electronic copies of this **Federal Register** document are available at *http://www.regulations.gov* and at *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.* Also this document, as well as news releases and other relevant information, is available at OSHA's Webpage, *http://www.osha.gov.* Authority and Signature Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice under the authority granted by section 7 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 656), section 107 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (Construction Safety Act) (40 U.S.C. 3701, *et seq.* ), the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2), and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2007 (72 FR 31159). Signed at Washington, DC, this 7th day of February 2008. Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety & Health. [FR Doc. E8-2625 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-26-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Occupational Safety and Health Administration [Docket No. OSHA-2008-0008] Design of Cave-in Protection Systems; Extension of the Office of Management and Budget's

(OMB)Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork) Requirements AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor. ACTION: Request for public comment. SUMMARY: OSHA solicits comments concerning its request for an extension of the information collection requirements contained in 29 CFR 1926.652, Requirements for Protective Systems. DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by April 14, 2008. ADDRESSES: *Electronically:* You may submit comments and attachments electronically at *http://www.regulations.gov,* which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting comments. *Facsimile:* If your comments, including attachments, are not longer than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at

(202)693-1648. *Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:* When using this method, you must submit three copies of your comments and attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, OSHA Docket No. OSHA-2008-0008, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service) are accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket Office's normal business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t. *Instructions:* All submissions must include the Agency name and OSHA docket number for the ICR (OSHA-2008-0008). All comments, including any personal information you provide, are placed in the public docket without change, and may be made available online at *http://www.regulations.gov.* For further information on submitting comments see the “Public Participation” heading in the section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . *Docket:* To read or download comments or other material in the docket, go to *http://www.regulations.gov* or the OSHA Docket Office at the address above. All documents in the docket (including this **Federal Register** notice) are listed in the *http://www.regulations.gov* index; however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download through the Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Michael Buchet at the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Buchet, Directorate of Construction, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3468, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone

(202)693-2020. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs) is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651, *et seq.* ) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for enforcement of the Act or for developing information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also requires that OSHA obtain such information with minimum burden upon employers, especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce to the maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657). Paragraphs

(b)and

(c)of § 1926.652 (“Requirements for Protective Systems”; the “Standard”) contain paperwork requirements that impose burden hours or costs on employers. These paragraphs require employers to use protective systems to prevent cave-ins during excavation work; these systems include sloping the side of the trench, benching the soil away from the excavation, or using a support system or shield (such as a trench box). The Standard specifies allowable configuration and slopes for excavations, and provides appendices to assist employers in designing protective systems. However, paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4) of the Standard permit employers to design sloping or benching systems based on tabulated data (Option 1), or to use a design approved by a registered professional engineer (Option 2). Under Option 1, employers must provide the tabulated data in a written form that also identifies the registered professional engineer who approved the data and the parameters used to select the sloping or benching system drawn from the data, as well as the limitations of the data (including the magnitude and configuration of slopes determined to be safe); the document must also provide any explanatory information necessary to select the correct benching system based on the data. Option 2 requires employers to develop a written design approved by a registered professional engineer. The design information must include the magnitude and configuration of the slopes determined to be safe, and the identity of the registered professional engineer who approved the design. Paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(4) allow employers to design support systems, shield systems, and other protective systems based on tabulated data provided by a system manufacturer (Option 3) or obtained from other sources and approved by a registered professional engineer (Option 4); they can also use a design approved by a registered professional engineer (Option 5). If they select Option 3, employers must complete a written form that provides the manufacturer's specifications, recommendations, and limitations, as well as any deviations approved by the manufacturer. The paperwork requirements of Option 4 are the same as for Option 1. Option 5 requires a written form that provides a plan indicting the sizes, types, and configurations of the materials used in the protective system and the identity of the registered professional engineer who approved the design. Each of these provisions requires employers to maintain a copy of the documents described in these options at the jobsite during construction. After construction is complete, employers may store the documents off-site provided they make them available to an OSHA compliance officer on request. These documents provide both the employer and the compliance officer with information needed to determine if the selection and design of a protective system are appropriate to the excavation work, thereby assuring employees of maximum protection against cave-ins. II. Special Issues for Comment OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues: • Whether the proposed information collection requirements are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions, including whether the information is useful; • The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and costs) of the information collection requirements, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • The quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and • Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply; for example, by using automated or other technological information collection and transmission techniques. III. Proposed Actions The Agency is requesting that OMB extend its approval of the information collection requirements contained in 29 CFR 1926.652, Requirements for Protective Systems. The Agency will summarize the comments submitted in response to this notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB to extend the approval of the information collection requirements contained in the Standard. *Type of Review:* Extension of currently approved information collection requirements. *Title:* Design of Cave-in Protection System. *OMB Number:* 1218-0137. *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profits. *Number of Respondents:* 20,000. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion. *Total Responses:* 20,000. *Average Time per Response:* Two hours to obtain information on the design of cave-in protection systems. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 20,022 hours. *Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance):* $815,400. IV. Public Participation—Submission of Comments on this Notice and Internet Access to Comments and Submissions You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:

(1)Electronically at *http://www.regulations.gov,* which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal;

(2)by facsimile (FAX); or

(3)by hard copy. All comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2008-0008). You may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES ). The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments by your name, date, and the docket number so the Agency can attach them to your comments. Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand, express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the OSHA Docket Office at

(202)693-2350 (TTY

(877)889-5627). Comments and submissions are posted without change at *http://www.regulations.gov.* Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about submitting personal information such as social security numbers and date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the *http://www.regulations.gov* index, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download through this Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on using the *http://www.regulations.gov* Web site to submit comments and access the docket is available at the Web site's “User Tips” link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about materials not available through the Web site, and for assistance in using the Internet to locate docket submissions. V. Authority and Signature Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506, *et seq.* ) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2007 (72 FR 31159). Signed at Washington, DC, on February 7, 2008. Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health. [FR Doc. E8-2624 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-26-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 72-64; EA-07-195] In the Matter of: Certain 10 CFR Part 72 Licensees Who Have Near-Term Plans To Store Spent Fuel in an ISFSI Under General License Provision of 10 CFR Part 72 Order Modifying License (Effective Immediately) AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Issuance of Order for Implementation of Additional Security Measures and Fingerprinting for Unescorted Access to Certain Spent Fuel Storage Licensees. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: L. Raynard Wharton, Senior Project Manager, Licensing and Inspection Directorate, Division of Spent Fuel Storage and Transportation, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Rockville, MD 20852. Telephone:

(301)492-3316; fax number:

(301)492-3350; e-mail: *LRW@nrc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.106, NRC (or the Commission) is providing notice, in the matter of Certain 10 CFR part 72 Licensees Who Have Near-Term Plans To Store Spent Fuel in an ISFSI Under General License Provisions of 10 CFR part 72 Order Modifying License (Effective Immediately). II. Further Information The licensees identified in Attachment 3 to this Order hold licenses issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission), authorizing the operation of an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI), in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and Title 10 of the *Code of Federal Regulations* (10 CFR) Part 72. This Order is being issued to these licensees because they have identified near-term plans to store spent fuel in an ISFSI under the general license provisions of 10 CFR part 72. The Commission's regulations at 10 CFR 72.212(b)(5) and 10 CFR 73.55(h)(1) require licensees to maintain safeguards and contingency plan procedures to respond to threats of radiological sabotage and to protect the spent fuel against the threat of radiological sabotage, in accordance with 10 CFR part 73, Appendix C. Specific safeguards requirements are contained in 10 CFR 73.51 or 73.55, as applicable. Inasmuch as an insider has an opportunity equal to, or greater than, any other person, to commit radiological sabotage, the Commission has determined these measures to be prudent. This Order or comparable Orders have been issued to all licensees that currently store spent fuel or have identified near-term plans to store spent fuel in an ISFSI. II On September 11, 2001, terrorists simultaneously attacked targets in New York, NY, and Washington, DC, using large commercial aircraft as weapons. In response to the attacks and intelligence information subsequently obtained, the Commission issued a number of Safeguards and Threat Advisories to its licensees, to strengthen licensees' capabilities and readiness to respond to a potential attack on a nuclear facility. On October 16, 2002, the Commission issued Orders to the licensees of operating ISFSIs, to place the actions taken in response to the Advisories into the established regulatory framework and to implement additional security enhancements that emerged from NRC's ongoing comprehensive review. The Commission has also communicated with other Federal, State, and local government agencies and industry representatives to discuss and evaluate the current threat environment in order to assess the adequacy of security measures at licensed facilities. In addition, the Commission has conducted a comprehensive review of its safeguards and security programs and requirements. As a result of its consideration of current safeguards and security requirements, as well as a review of information provided by the intelligence community, the Commission has determined that certain additional security measures

(ASMs)are required to address the current threat environment, in a consistent manner throughout the nuclear ISFSI community. Therefore, the Commission is imposing requirements, as set forth in Attachments 1 and 2 of this Order, on all licensees of these facilities. These requirements, which supplement existing regulatory requirements, will provide the Commission with reasonable assurance that the public health and safety and common defense and security continue to be adequately protected in the current threat environment. These requirements will remain in effect until the Commission determines otherwise. The Commission recognizes that licensees may have already initiated many of the measures set forth in Attachments 1 and 2 to this Order, in response to previously issued advisories, or on their own. It also recognizes that some measures may not be possible or necessary at some sites, or may need to be tailored to accommodate the specific circumstances existing at the licensee's facility, to achieve the intended objectives and avoid any unforeseen effect on the safe storage of spent fuel. Although the ASMs implemented by licensees in response to the Safeguards and Threat Advisories have been sufficient to provide reasonable assurance of adequate protection of public health and safety, the Commission concludes that these actions must be supplemented further because the current threat environment continues to persist. Therefore, it is appropriate to require certain ASMs, and these measures must be embodied in an Order, consistent with the established regulatory framework. To provide assurance that licensees are implementing prudent measures to achieve a consistent level of protection to address the current threat environment, licenses issued pursuant to 10 CFR 72.210 shall be modified to include the requirements identified in Attachments 1 and 2 to this Order. In addition, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, I find that, in light of the common defense and security circumstances described above, the public health, safety, and interest require that this Order be immediately effective. III Accordingly, pursuant to sections 53, 103, 104, 147, 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 and 10 CFR parts 50, 72, and 73, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, THAT YOUR GENERAL LICENSE IS MODIFIED AS FOLLOWS: A. The licensee shall comply with the requirements described in Attachments 1 and 2 to this Order, except to the extent that a more stringent requirement is set forth in the licensee's security plan. The licensee shall immediately start implementation of the requirements in Attachments 1 and 2 to the Order and shall complete implementation no later than 180 days from the date of this Order, with the exception of the ASM B.4 of Attachment 1 [“Additional Security Measures

(ASMs)for Physical Protection of Dry Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations (ISFSIs)”], which shall be implemented no later than 365 days from the date of this Order. In any event, the licensee shall complete implementation of all ASMs before the first day that spent fuel is initially placed in the ISFSI. B. 1. The licensee shall, within twenty

(20)days of the date of this Order, notify the Commission:

(1)if they are unable to comply with any of the requirements described in Attachments 1 and 2;

(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 the facility license. The notification shall provide the licensee's justification for seeking relief from, or variation of, any specific requirement. 2. If the licensee considers that implementation of any of the requirements described in Attachments 1 and 2 to this Order would adversely impact the safe storage of spent fuel, the licensee must notify the Commission, within twenty

(20)days of this Order, of the adverse safety impact, the basis for its determination that the requirement has an adverse safety impact, and either a proposal for achieving the same objectives specified in Attachments 1 and 2 requirements in question, or a schedule for modifying the facility, to address the adverse safety condition. If neither approach is appropriate, the licensee must supplement its response, to Condition B.1 of this Order, to identify the condition as a requirement with which it cannot comply, with attendant justifications, as required under Condition B.1. C. 1. The licensee shall, within twenty

(20)days of this Order, submit to the Commission, a schedule for achieving compliance with each requirement described in Attachments 1 and 2. 2. The licensee shall report to the Commission when it has achieved full compliance with the requirements described in Attachments 1 and 2. D. All measures implemented or actions taken in response to this Order shall be maintained until the Commission determines otherwise. The licensee's response to Conditions B.1, B.2, C.1, and C.2, above, shall be submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 72.4. In addition, submittals that contain Safeguards Information shall be properly marked and handled, in accordance with 10 CFR 73.21. The Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, may, in writing, relax or rescind any of the above conditions, for good cause. 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 20 days of the date of the Order. In addition, the licensee and any other person adversely affected by this Order, may request a hearing on this Order within 20 days of the date of the Order. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the time to answer or request a hearing. A request for extension of time must be made, in writing, to the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, 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 NRC E-filing Final Rule was issued on August 28, 2007, (72 Fed. Reg. 49,139) and codified in pertinent part at 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart B. 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 waivers 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, they 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 grounds 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 as specified in section III 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 as 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 at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of January, 2008 For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Michael F. Weber, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. Attachment 1—Additional Measures

(ASMs)for Physical Protection of Dry Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations (ISFSIs) contains Safeguards Information and is not included in the **Federal Register** Notice Attachment 2—Additional Security Measures for Access Authorization and Fingerprinting at Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations A. General Basis Criteria 1. These additional security measures

(ASMs)are established to delineate an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) licensee's responsibility to enhance security measures related to authorization for unescorted access to the protected area of an ISFSI in response to the current threat environment. 2. Licensees whose ISFSI is collocated with a power reactor may choose to comply with the NRC-approved reactor access authorization program for the associated reactor as an alternative means to satisfy the provisions of sections B through G below. Otherwise, licensees shall comply with the access authorization and fingerprinting requirements of section B through G of these ASMs. 3. Licensees shall clearly distinguish in their 20-day response which method they intend to use in order to comply with these ASMs. B. Additional Security Measures for Access Authorization Program 1. The licensee shall develop, implement and maintain a program, or enhance their existing program, designed to ensure that persons granted unescorted access to the protected area of an ISFSI are trustworthy and reliable and do not constitute an unreasonable risk to the public health and safety or the common defense and security, including a potential to commit radiological sabotage. a. To establish trustworthiness and reliability, the licensee shall develop, implement, and maintain procedures for conducting and completing background investigations, prior to granting access. The scope of background investigations must address at least the past 3 years and, as a minimum, must include: i. Fingerprinting and a Federal Bureau of Investigation

(FBI)identification and criminal history records check (CHRC). Where an applicant for unescorted access has been previously fingerprinted with a favorably completed CHRC, (such as a CHRC pursuant to compliance with orders for access to safeguards information) the licensee may accept the results of that CHRC, and need not submit another set of fingerprints, provided the CHRC was completed not more than 3 years from the date of the application for unescorted access. ii. Verification of employment with each previous employer for the most recent year from the date of application. iii. Verification of employment with an employer of the longest duration during any calendar month for the remaining next most recent two years. iv. A full credit history review. v. An interview with not less than two character references, developed by the investigator. vi. A review of official identification (e.g., driver's license, passport, government identification, state, province or country of birth issued certificate of birth) to allow comparison of personal information data provided by the applicant. The licensee shall maintain a photocopy of the identifying document(s) on file, in accordance with “Protection of Information,” Section G of these ASMs. vii. Licensees shall confirm eligibility for employment through the regulations of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and shall verify and ensure to the extent possible, the accuracy of the provided social security number and alien registration number as applicable. b. The procedures developed or enhanced shall include measures for confirming the term, duration, and character of military service, and academic enrollment and attendance in lieu of employment, for the past 3 and 5 years respectively. c. Licensees need not conduct an independent investigation for individuals employed at a facility who possess active “Q” or “L” clearances or possess another active U.S. Government granted security clearance, i.e., Top Secret, Secret or Confidential. d. A review of the applicant's criminal history, obtained from local criminal justice resources, may be included in addition to the FBI CHRC, and is encouraged if the results of the FBI CHRC, employment check, or credit check disclose derogatory information. The scope of the applicant's local criminal history check shall cover all residences of record for the past 3 years from the date of the application for unescorted access. 2. The licensee shall use any information obtained as part of a CHRC solely for the purpose of determining an individual's suitability for unescorted access to the protected area of an ISFSI. 3. The licensee shall document the basis for its determination for granting or denying access to the protected area of an ISFSI. 4. The licensee shall develop, implement, and maintain procedures for updating background investigations for persons who are applying for reinstatement of unescorted access. Licensees need not conduct an independent reinvestigation for individuals who possess active “Q” or “L” clearances or possess another active U.S. Government granted security clearance, i.e., Top Secret, Secret or Confidential. 5. The licensee shall develop, implement, and maintain procedures for reinvestigations of persons granted unescorted access, at intervals not to exceed 5 years. Licensees need not conduct an independent reinvestigation for individuals employed at a facility who possess active “Q” or “L” clearances or possess another active U.S. Government granted security clearance, i.e., Top Secret, Secret or Confidential. 6. The licensee shall develop, implement, and maintain procedures designed to ensure that persons who have been denied unescorted access authorization to the facility are not allowed access to the facility, even under escort. 7. The licensee shall develop, implement, and maintain an audit program for licensee and contractor/vendor access authorization programs that evaluate all program elements and include a person knowledgeable and practiced in access authorization program performance objectives to assist in the overall assessment of the site's program effectiveness. C. Fingerprinting Program Requirements 1. In a letter to the NRC, the licensee must nominate an individual who will review the results of the FBI CHRCs to make trustworthiness and reliability determinations for unescorted access to an ISFSI. This individual, referred to as the “reviewing official,” must be someone who requires unescorted access to the ISFSI. The NRC will review the CHRC of any individual nominated to perform the reviewing official function. Based on the results of the CHRC, the NRC staff will determine whether this individual may have access. If the NRC determines that the nominee may not be granted such access, that individual will be prohibited from obtaining access. 1 Once the NRC approves a reviewing official, the reviewing official is the only individual permitted to make access determinations for other individuals who have been identified by the licensee as having the need for unescorted access to the ISFSI, and have been fingerprinted and have had a CHRC in accordance with these ASMs. The reviewing official can only make access determinations for other individuals, and therefore cannot approve other individuals to act as reviewing officials. Only the NRC can approve a reviewing official. Therefore, if the licensee wishes to have a new or additional reviewing official, the NRC must approve that individual before he or she can act in the capacity of a reviewing official. 1 The NRC's determination of this individual's unescorted access to the ISFSI, in accordance with the process is an administrative determination that is outside the scope of the Order. 2. No person may have access to SGI or unescorted access to any facility subject to NRC regulation if the NRC has determined, in accordance with its administrative review process based on fingerprinting and an FBI identification and CHRC, that the person may not have access to SGI or unescorted access to any facility subject to NRC regulation. 3. All fingerprints obtained by the licensee pursuant to this Order must be submitted to the Commission for transmission to the FBI. 4. The licensee shall notify each affected individual that the fingerprints will be used to conduct 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” in section F of these ASMs. 5. Fingerprints need not be taken if the employed individual ( *e.g.* , a licensee employee, contractor, manufacturer, or supplier) is relieved from the fingerprinting requirement by 10 CFR 73.61, has a favorably adjudicated U.S. Government CHRC within the last five

(5)years, or has an active federal security clearance. Written confirmation from the Agency/employer who granted the federal security clearance or reviewed the CHRC must be provided to the licensee. The licensee must retain this documentation for a period of three

(3)years from the date the individual no longer requires access to the facility. D. Prohibitions 1. A licensee shall not base a final determination to deny an individual unescorted access to the protected area of an ISFSI 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. 2. A licensee shall not use information received from a CHRC 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. E. Procedures for Processing Fingerprint Checks 1. For the purpose of complying with this Order, licensees shall, using an appropriate method listed in 10 CFR 73.4, submit to the NRC's Division of Facilities and Security, Mail Stop T-6E46, one completed, legible standard fingerprint card (Form FD-258, ORIMDNRCOOOZ) or, where practicable, other fingerprint records for each individual seeking unescorted access to an ISFSI, to the Director of the Division of Facilities and Security, marked for the attention of the Division's Criminal History Check Section. Copies of these forms may be obtained by writing the Office of Information Services, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by calling

(301)415-5877, or by e-mail to *forms@nrc.gov.* Practicable alternative formats are set forth in 10 CFR 73.4. The licensee shall establish procedures to ensure that the quality of the fingerprints taken results in minimizing the rejection rate of fingerprint cards due to illegible or incomplete cards. 2. The NRC will review submitted fingerprint cards for completeness. Any Form FD-258 fingerprint record containing omissions or evident errors will be returned to the licensee for corrections. The fee for processing fingerprint checks includes one re-submission if the initial submission is returned by the FBI because the fingerprint impressions cannot be classified. The one free resubmission must have the FBI Transaction Control Number reflected on the re-submission. If additional submissions are necessary, they will be treated as initial submittals and will require a second payment of the processing fee. 3. Fees for processing fingerprint checks are due upon application. The licensee shall submit payment of the processing fees electronically. In order to be able to submit secure electronic payments, licensees will need to establish an account with Pay.Gov ( *https://www.pay.gov* ). To request an account, the licensee shall send an e-mail to *det@nrc.gov.* The email must include the licensee's company name, address, point of contact (POC), POC e-mail address, and phone number. The NRC will forward the request to Pay.Gov; who will contact the licensee with a password and user lD. Once licensees have established an account and submitted payment to Pay.Gov, they shall obtain a receipt. The licensee shall submit the receipt from Pay.Gov to the NRC along with fingerprint cards. For additional guidance on making electronic payments, contact the Facilities Security Branch, Division of Facilities and Security, at

(301)415-7739. Combined payment for multiple applications is acceptable. The application fee (currently $36) is the sum of the user fee charged by the FBI for each fingerprint card or other fingerprint record submitted by the NRC on behalf of a licensee, and an NRC processing fee, which covers administrative costs associated with NRC handling of licensee fingerprint submissions. The Commission will directly notify licensees who are subject to this regulation of any fee changes. 4. The Commission will forward to the submitting licensee all data received from the FBI as a result of the licensee's application(s) for criminal history records checks, including the FBI fingerprint record. F. Right To Correct and Complete Information 1. Prior to any final adverse determination, the licensee shall make available to the individual the contents of any criminal history 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 notification. 2. 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 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 a FBI CHRC after the record is made available for his/her review. The licensee may make a final access 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 access to an ISFSI, the licensee shall provide the individual its documented basis for denial. Access to an ISFSI shall not be granted to an individual during the review process. G. Protection of Information 1. The licensee shall develop, implement, and maintain a system for personnel information management with appropriate procedures for the protection of personal, confidential information. This system shall be designed to prohibit unauthorized access to sensitive information and to prohibit modification of the information without authorization. 2. 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. 3. 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 suitability for unescorted access to the protected area of an ISFSI. No individual authorized to have access to the information may re-disseminate the information to any other individual who does not have the appropriate need-to-know. 4. The personal information obtained on an individual from a criminal history record check may be transferred to another licensee if the gaining licensee 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. 5. 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. Attachment 3—Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Addressee List Timothy J. O'Connor, Site Vice-President, Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, Nuclear Management Company, LLC, Docket No. 72-58, 2807 West County Road 75, Monticello, MN 55362-9637. David A. Christian, Senior Vice-President and Chief Nuclear Officer, Innsbrook Technical Center, Kewaunee Power Station, Docket No. 72-64, 5000 Dominion Boulevard, Glen Allen, VA 23060-6711. Christopher M. Crane, President and Chief Nuclear Officer, Exelon Nuclear, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Limerick Generating Station, Docket No. 72-65, 200 Exelon Way, KSA 3-E, Kennett Square, PA 19348. Stewart B. Minahan, Vice President-Nuclear and CNO, Nebraska Public Power District, Cooper Nuclear Station, Docket No. 72-66, 72676 648A Avenue, Brownville, NE 68321. [FR Doc. E8-2714 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-266 and 301] Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Notice of Withdrawal of Application for Amendment To Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-24 and DPR-27; FPL Energy Point Beach, LLC; Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has granted the request of FPL Energy Point Beach, LLC, (the licensee) to withdraw its October 1, 2007, application for proposed amendment to Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-24 and DPR-27 for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units No. 1 and 2, located in Manitowoc County, Wisconsin. The proposed amendment would have revised the accident source term in the design-basis radiological consequences analyses and the associated Technical Specifications (TSs), pursuant to Section 50.67 of Part 50 of Title 10 of the *Code of Federal Regulations* (10 CFR 50.67). The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment published in the **Federal Register** on November 20, 2007, (72 FR 65366). However, by letter dated January 30, 2008, the licensee withdrew the proposed change. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated October 1, 2007, and the licensee's letter dated January 30, 2008, which withdrew the application for a license amendment. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the internet at the NRC Web site, *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html.* Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of February 2008. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Jack Cushing, Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E8-2711 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-57289; File No. SR-Amex-2008-06] Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Amex Rule 3-AEMI February 7, 2008. 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 January 31, 2007, the American Stock Exchange LLC (“Amex” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend Amex Rule 3-AEMI to include provisions regarding the prevention of the misuse of material nonpublic information by members, member organizations, or persons associated with such members, pursuant to the Act. The text of the proposed rule change is available at Amex, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.Amex.com.* II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, 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. Amex has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of the proposal is to amend Amex Rule 3-AEMI to include provisions regarding the prevention of the misuse of material nonpublic information by members, member organizations, or persons associated with such members, pursuant to section 15(f) of the Act. 5 section 15(f) requires that every registered broker or dealer establish, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed, taking into consideration the nature of such broker's or dealer's business, to prevent the misuse of material, nonpublic information by such broker or dealer or any person associated with such broker or dealer. The Commission previously approved proposals by the Amex to amend non-AEMI Amex Rule 3 to require members to establish, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures to prevent the misuse of material nonpublic information. 6 This filing proposes to update Amex Rule 3-AEMI to adopt the rules in non-AEMI Amex Rule 3 concerning the prevention of the misuse of material nonpublic information, as previously approved by the Commission. 5 15 U.S.C. 78o(f). 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-54983 (Dec. 20, 2006), 71 FR 78476 (Dec. 29, 2006) (File No. SR-Amex-2006-86). *See also* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-55187 (Jan. 29, 2007), 72 FR 5467 (Feb. 6, 2007) (File No. SR-Amex-2006-110). 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act 7 in general, and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(5) 8 in particular, in that it would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market in a manner consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The 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 does not:

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

(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, it has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. As required under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act, 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. A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Waiver of the 30-day operative delay would enable the Exchange to implement and enforce the new provisions relating to the prevention of the misuse of material nonpublic information in Amex Rule 3-AEMI immediately. For this reason, the Commission therefore designates the proposal to become operative immediately. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-Amex-2008-06 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2008-06. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of Amex. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2008-06 and should be submitted on or before March 5, 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. E8-2614 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-57285; File No. SR-CBOE-2008-10] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Exchange Membership Fees February 7, 2008. 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 January 22, 2008, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the CBOE. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) proposes to amend its Fees Schedule relating to its membership application fees. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the CBOE, on the Exchange's Web site at *http://www.cboe.org/legal,* and in the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, CBOE included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of this proposed rule change is to amend the CBOE Fees Schedule relating to its membership application fees to add a trading firm renewal fee (“Trading Firm Renewal Fee”). Membership application fees are set forth in section 11 of the CBOE Fees Schedule as well as in a regulatory circular (“Membership Fee Circular”). The proposed Trading Firm Renewal Fee will apply to a former CBOE trading firm member that reapplies for CBOE membership within 9 months of its membership termination date and becomes an effective CBOE member within 1 year of its membership termination date. The Trading Firm Renewal Fee will encompass the trading firm application, and related documentation, and one nominee 3 who is either

(i)an existing individual CBOE member desiring to change membership status or

(ii)a former individual CBOE member who reapplies for membership within 9 months of their membership termination date and becomes an effective member within 1 year of their membership termination date. 3 A nominee is an individual who is authorized by a trading firm member, in accordance with CBOE Rule 3.8, to represent such trading firm member in all matters relating to the Exchange. The Trading Firm Renewal Fee will be $2,000. 2. Statutory Basis The proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act, 4 in general, and furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(4) 5 of the Act 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. 4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 5 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 purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change establishes or changes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange, it has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 6 and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 7 thereunder. 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. 6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 7 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-2008-10 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-2008-10. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the CBOE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2008-10 and should be submitted on or before March 5, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 8 8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-2612 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-57286; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-122] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change as Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto Amending Its Obvious Error Rule for Options on Indices, ETFs, and HOLDRS February 7, 2008. On October 31, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 a proposed rule change to amend CBOE Rule 24.16 (“Rule 24.16” or “Rule”), which is the Exchange's rule applicable to the nullification and adjustment of transactions in index options, options on exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”), and options on HOLding Company Depository ReceiptS (“HOLDRS”), to change the manner in which the Rule applies the obvious price error provision to transactions occurring as part of the Hybrid Opening System (“HOSS”) process. On December 14, 2007, the CBOE submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on December 28, 2007. 3 The Commission received no comment letters on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change, as amended. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57005 (December 20, 2007), 72 FR 73919. Currently, Rule 24.16 provides that an obvious price error will be deemed to have occurred when the execution price of a buy

(sell)transaction is above (below) the fair market value of the option by at least the prescribed minimum error amount, as set forth in the Rule. For purposes of transactions occurring on HOSS, “fair market value” is currently defined as the midpoint of the first quote after the transaction(s) in question that does not reflect the erroneous transaction(s). The Exchange proposes to revise the definition of fair market value to provide additional conditions that would apply during regular HOSS rotations and during HOSS rotations in index options series that are being used to calculate the final settlement price of volatility indexes on the final settlement day. According to CBOE, the additional conditions are intended to reasonably factor the amount of available liquidity into the fair market value calculation during these rotations. With respect to regular HOSS rotations, the Exchange proposes to add a condition that the option contract quantity subject to nullification or adjustment cannot exceed the size of the first quote after the transaction(s) in question that does not reflect the erroneous transaction(s). Any nullification or adjustment would occur on a *pro rata* basis and would take into account the overall size of the HOSS opening trade. With respect to HOSS rotations in index options series that are used to calculate the final settlement price of a volatility index on the final settlement day, the Exchange proposes to add a condition that the first quote after the transaction(s) in question that does not reflect the erroneous transaction(s) must be for at least the overall size of the HOSS opening trade. If the size of the quote is less than the overall size of the HOSS opening trade, then the obvious price error provision shall not apply. 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 4 and, in particular, the requirements of section 6(b) of the Act 5 and the rules and regulations thereunder. Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 6 in that the proposal is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market, and to protect investors and the public interest. 4 In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The Commission considers that in most circumstances trades that are executed between parties should be honored. On rare occasions, the price of the executed trade indicates an “obvious error” may exist, suggesting that it is unrealistic to expect that the parties to the trade had come to a meeting of the minds regarding the terms of the transaction. In the Commission's view, the determination of whether an “obvious error” has occurred and the process for reviewing such a determination should be based on specific and objective criteria and subject to specific and objective procedures. The Commission believes that the Exchange's proposal to revise Rule 24.16 by modifying the manner in which the Rule applies its obvious price error provision to transactions in index options, options on ETFs, and options on HOLDRS that occur as part of the HOSS process during regular opening rotations and during opening rotations on the final settlement day for volatility indexes is appropriate. The proposal provides for an objective standard because in each of the foregoing situations, the fair market value calculation must take into account the size of the quote. *It is therefore ordered* , pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 7 that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2007-122), as amended, is hereby approved. 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 8 8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-2613 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-57283; File No. SR-DTC-2007-11] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 to Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Operational Arrangements as It Applies to Structured Securities February 6, 2008. Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder 2 notice is hereby given that on September 7, 2007, The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on November 26, 2007. 3 The Commission received four comments on the original proposal. 4 On December 14, 2007, DTC filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 5 The filing, as amended, is described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared primarily by DTC. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested parties. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-56795 (November 15, 2007), 72 FR 66009. 4 Simon Griffiths, Vice President, JP Morgan (December 10, 2007); Tom Migneron, Principal, Edward Jones (December 11, 2007); Dan W. Schneider, Baker & McKenzie LLP, Counsel to the Association of Global Custodians, Chicago, Illinois (December 12, 2007); Norman Eaker, Chairman, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, Operations Committee, Gussie Tate, President, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, Dividend Division, and Thomas Hamilton, Vice Chairman, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, MBS and Securitized Products Division Executive Committee (December 19, 2007). 5 Amendment No. 1 replaces and supersedes the original filing in its entirety. Amendment No. 1 corrects an inadvertent reference to “issuer” instead of “underwriter” in Section 2(ii). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The proposed rule change seeks approval to amend DTC's “Operational Arrangements Necessary for an Issue to Become and Remain Eligible for DTC Services” (“Operational Arrangements”) as it applies to Structured Securities. DTC's Operational Arrangements is a contractual agreement between DTC, issuers, and paying agents that outlines the procedural and operational requirements for an issue to become and remain DTC eligible. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, DTC 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. DTC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and

(C)below, of the most significant aspects of these statements. 6 6 The Commission has modified the text of the summaries prepared by DTC.

(A)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change The proposed rule change seeks to amend DTC's Operational Arrangements as it applies to Structured Securities in order to: extend the deadline by which paying agents of such securities must submit periodic payment rate information to DTC; establish an exception processing fee applied to certain Structured Securities whose features prevent paying agents from complying with the extended deadline; and provide that DTC track and make publicly available reports on paying agent performance as it relates to timeliness and accuracy of Structured Securities payment rate information submitted to DTC. 1. Background On September 7, 2007, DTC filed with the Commission proposed rule change DTC-2007-11. Amendment No. 1 removes reference to the imposition of a processing fee on January 1, 2008, and corrects the identity of the party that will identify an issue as conforming or non-conforming and will submit a written attestation giving the reason for non-conformance. A Structured Security, such as a collateralized mortgage obligation or asset-backed security (“ABS”), is a bond backed by a pool of underlying financial assets. The underlying assets generally consist of receivables such as mortgages, credit card receivables, or student or other bank loans for which the timing of principal payments by the underlying obligors may be variable and unpredictable. A Structured Security may also incorporate credit enhancements or other rights that affect the amount and timing of payments to investors. Communication of periodic payment rates of principal and interest (“P&I”) to the end investors in Structured Securities depends on application of stringent time frames for information reporting and significant interdependencies among servicers of the underlying assets, specifically trustees, custodians, paying agents on the securities, DTC, and the financial intermediaries that act on behalf of the investors. Given the complexity of structure and calculations of cash flow from the underlying assets through the issuer to the end investor and the interdependencies on timeliness and accuracy of performance throughout the chain of servicers and intermediaries, timely and accurate submission of payment rate information on Structured Securities may be difficult to achieve. As a result, payment rates typically are announced late on a significant number of issues, and the number of post-payable adjustments made to correct inaccurate payments resulting from inaccurate payment rate information is higher than for any other security type. Furthermore, the volume of P&I payments for Structured Securities processed through DTC has grown rapidly in recent years and currently represents approximately 25% of all P&I payments processed through DTC. Incorrect and late payment rate reporting causes increased operations processing costs, inefficient cash management, and loss of income. Accordingly, DTC formed a cross-industry working group to study the severity of the problem of processing Structured Securities P&I and to analyze possible solutions. 7 In its analysis, the working group studied the payment rate reporting history of various Structured Securities, noting factors such as paying agent and type of deal structure. The working group determined that extending the date by which paying agents must submit rate information to DTC would allow a greater number of Structured Securities to meet DTC's requirements and thus be eligible for DTC services. It also concluded that there is a significant subset of Structured Securities for which the paying agent may not be able to comply even with an extended time frame for delivery of payment rate information because of features inherent in the structure of the security issue. It determined these securities should be expressly identified and handled as issues that require exception processing. Finally, it concluded that paying agent rate reporting performance on all Structured Securities should be evaluated and made publicly available to participants and other relevant parties. Accordingly, DTC proposes to implement the changes set forth below. 7 The group consisted of representatives from the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), major paying agents, servicers and master servicers, underwriters, and major retail and institutional broker-dealers and custodians. 2. Proposed Amendments to Operational Arrangements DTC's Operational Arrangements governs issue eligibility for deposit at DTC and issuer and agent obligations regarding servicing of the issue thereafter. Regarding notification on issues that pay P&I periodically or that pay interest at a variable rate, the Operational Arrangements currently requires the paying agent on the security to provide payment rate information to DTC preferably five business days but no later than two business days prior to the payable date.

(i)Extending the Deadline for Reporting on Payment Detail Currently, the majority of Structured Securities have features that prevent paying agents from being able to adhere to the current Operational Arrangements rate reporting deadline. DTC is proposing to amend the Operational Arrangements to require that the payment notification regarding Structured Securities be provided to DTC by the paying agent preferably five business days but no later than one business day prior to the payable date. In addition, DTC will extend its current processing deadline for receipt of payment rate files from 7 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. The extended deadlines should allow paying agents to provide rates in a timely and accurate fashion for a majority of Structured Securities issues and should permit the securities to remain eligible for DTC's services while still providing DTC with adequate time to process the information and make timely payments to its participants.

(ii)Securities Classifications Due to the complexity of certain Structured Securities, it is anticipated that the paying agents for certain issues will still not be able to meet the amended Operational Arrangements requirements for timely payment rate reporting even with the extended reporting period. 8 Therefore, DTC proposes to distinguish between “conforming” and “non-conforming” Structured Securities. Non-conforming Structured Securities will be issues for which the underwriter and paying agent have concluded that the security has features that will likely preclude the paying agent from submitting rate information to DTC in conformity with the requirements of the Operational Arrangements. The conforming/non-conforming identification will be made at the time the security is made eligible at DTC. For each Structured Securities underwriting that the underwriter and paying agent identify as non-conforming, the underwriter and paying agent shall submit a written attestation giving the reason for non-conformance. DTC will in turn identify non-conforming Structured Securities to participants and other relevant parties and will add an indicator to the appropriate DTC systems functions to denote non-conforming securities. Paying agents also shall be required to evaluate their entire portfolio of Structured Securities that have previously been made eligible and are currently on deposit at DTC to identify non-conforming securities. 8 Although approximately 15% of Structured Security issues currently fail to have rates submitted to DTC in a timely manner, it is estimated that approximately only half of these have structural impediments to meeting the new requirements. Failures in timely rate reporting in other instances are believed to be curable by improved servicing and reporting on the securities.

(iii)Exception Processing Fee Applicable to Non-Conforming Securities Securities processing inefficiencies and rate inaccuracies associated with late payment rate reporting lead to increased costs. In order to recoup the increased processing costs, DTC is proposing to impose an exception processing fee to the managing underwriter of the non-conforming issue at the time of underwriting. No fee will be charged retroactively on issues already on deposit at DTC prior to the implementation of the fee. The exception processing fee of $4,200 per CUSIP was calculated based upon anticipated excess costs of P&I processing for non-conforming Structured Securities. The fee was filed with the SEC as part of DTC's annual establishment of fees. 9 9 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-57193 (January 24, 2008), 73 FR 5614. The aggregate net amount of the exception processing fees will be allocated and rebated on a pro rata basis annually to the DTC participants for whom DTC processed Structured Securities P&I allocations. For each participant, DTC would compare the participant's total number of allocations to the total number of all participants' allocations, and the resulting percentage would be applied against the total exception processing fund with the resulting amount being rebated to the participant. The total exception processing fund would be calculated as the sum of all exception processing fees less DTC's cost to administer the program.

(iv)Evaluation and Publication of Paying Agent Performance DTC is proposing to track and evaluate paying agent performance with regard to timeliness and accuracy of payment rate reporting on Structured Securities and to make these evaluations available to DTC participants and to the public. The purpose of these evaluations is to identify poor payment and reporting performance for which a paying agent should be able, based on its attestation, to correct any underlying servicing issues associated with the payment and information flows. DTC plans to expand evaluation reports ( “Report Cards”) that are currently used to compare rate submission performance and accuracy of Structured Securities paying agents. Currently the Report Cards are only distributed among the paying agents being compared. DTC is proposing to make the Report Cards available on its Web site. The Report Card tracks and reports performance for a given month by paying agent with respect to the number of collateralized mortgage obligations and asset-backed securities announcements processed, the number of late and amended announcements, the payment dollars, late payment dollars, and the number of payments and late payments. Timeliness of payment rate notification on non-conforming Structured Securities will not be included in the proposed paying agent performance evaluation based on the paying agent's attestation that the Structured Security is a non-conforming issue. The other factors will be included with respect to both conforming and non-conforming securities.

(v)Conclusion In summary, altering the Operational Arrangements to allow paying agents additional time in which to report payment rates will allow more issues of Structured Securities to be eligible at DTC. Identification of issues that cannot meet the proposed extended reporting deadlines and reporting on paying agent performance will allow the industry to anticipate processing inefficiencies associated with certain Structured Securities issues. Furthermore, imposition of an exception processing fee on Structured Securities that cannot meet the extended reporting deadlines due to deal structure will shift the expense associated with these securities to the underwriters and issuers that create the structure. DTC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of section 17A of the Act 10 and the rules and regulations thereunder because the proposed changes removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a national system for the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions. 10 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.

(B)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition DTC does not believe that the proposed rule change will have any impact or impose any burden on competition.

(C)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Commission received four written comment letters to the original proposed rule change, which was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on November 26, 2007. 11 These comments to the proposed rule change and any received to its amended version will be summarized and responded to in a future Commission release. 11 *Supra* , note 3. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within thirty-five days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period:

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

(ii)as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:

(A)By order approve such proposed rule change or

(B)Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ) or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-DTC-2007-11 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-DTC-2007-11. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filings also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of DTC and on DTC's Web site at: *http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/rule_filings/2007/dtc/2007-11-amendment.pdf* . 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-DTC-2007-11 and should be submitted on or before February 28, 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. E8-2577 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-57291; File No. SR-NYSE-2007-113] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Amend Annual Fees Applicable to Groups of Real Estate Investment Trusts Under Common External Management February 7, 2008. I. Introduction On December 20, 2007, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 a proposed rule change to amend Annual Fees applicable to groups of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“REITs”) under common external management. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on January 4, 2008. 3 The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57061 (December 28, 2007), 73 FR 0902. II. Description of the Proposal The Exchange proposes to amend section 902 of the Listed Company Manual by inserting proposed new section 902.03A. In its filing, the Exchange stated that in a limited number of cases, a single entity or affiliated entities may externally manage more than one REIT. As an incentive for all of the REITs in such a group to list on the Exchange, the Exchange is proposing to offer a group discount on Annual Fees when there are at least three REITs under common external management. REITs will continue to be subject to the Annual Fees applicable to listed equity securities as set forth in section 902.03. However, section 902.03A will provide that, where all of the operations of each of a group of three or more listed REITs are externally managed by the same entity or by affiliated entities, each REIT in the group will receive a 30% discount on the applicable Annual Fees in relation to any year in which the common management relationship exists as of January 1. A newly-listed REIT that qualifies for the discount will receive it in relation to the part of the year for which it pays a prorated Annual Fee upon initial listing. For example, a REIT that lists on July 1 and whose outstanding number of shares would subject it to a $100,000 Annual Fee would normally pay a prorated amount of $50,000 because it would be listed for exactly half of the first year of listing. If that REIT qualifies for the group discount, it would pay $35,000 (70% of the prorated Annual Fee that would otherwise be payable). This filing seeks approval to apply the discount retroactively to January 1, 2008. III. Discussion and Commission Findings 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. 4 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with section 6(b)(4) of the Act, 5 which requires that an exchange have rules that provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and other persons using its facilities. The Commission also finds that the proposal is consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 6 which requires, *inter alia* , that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and not designed to permit unfair discrimination between issuers. 4 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). The Commission notes that the Exchange does not believe the limitation of the proposed discount to groups of three or more REITS under common external management is unfairly discriminatory. In support of this the Exchange states that:

(i)It has a reasonable competitive justification for the discount;

(ii)if it applied the discount to groups of less than three REITS it could lead to a significant loss of revenue to the Exchange; and

(iii)it is not increasing the Annual Fees for REITs, and other, issuers. The Commission also notes that the Exchange has represented that the loss of revenue from the discount, as proposed, will not hinder its ability to fulfill its regulatory responsibilities. The Commission believes it is reasonable for the Exchange to balance its need to remain competitive, while at the same time ensuring adequate revenue to meet its regulatory responsibilities. The Commission further notes that the Annual Fees applicable to all other REITs and operating companies are remaining unchanged, so no company that is not qualified for the discount is being asked to pay higher Annual Fees than it is currently paying. In light of these arguments, the Commission agrees that the proposed discount, which is retroactively effective to January 1, 2008, does not constitute an inequitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges, does not permit unfair discrimination between issuers, and is generally consistent with the Act. IV. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 7 that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2007-113) is hereby approved. 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 8 Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-2610 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-57284; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2008-16] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rules Pertaining to the Terms of Index Option Contracts February 7, 2008. 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 January 30, 2007, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared substantially by NYSE Arca. NYSE Arca filed the proposed rule change as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change NYSE Arca proposes to amend Rule 5.19(a) (Terms of Index Option Contracts) to allow the listing of up to seven expiration months for options on certain broad-based indexes. NYSE Arca proposes to implement the proposed rule change immediately. The text of the proposed rule change is available at *http://www.nyse.com,* the principal office of NYSE Arca, and the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, NYSE Arca included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. NYSE Arca has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose NYSE Arca proposes to amend Rule 5.19 (Terms of Index Options Contracts) to allow the Exchange to list up to seven expiration months for broad-based security index options upon which a constant three-month volatility index is calculated. Currently, Rule 5.19(a)(3) permits the Exchange to list only six expiration months in any index options at any one time. Volatility products offer investors a unique set of tools for hedging. For example, the Chicago Board Options Exchange (“CBOE”) Volatility Index (“VIX”) options, first introduced in February 2006, have proven to be one of CBOE's most successful new products ever listed, currently averaging over 90,000 contracts traded per day. In a recent proposal, CBOE explained that it plans to introduce new volatility products and new volatility indexes in the near future, including the CBOE S&P 500 Three-Month Volatility Index (“VXV”). 5 Similar to the VIX, the VXV is a measure of S&P 500 implied volatility, the volatility implied by S&P option prices. Instead of reflecting a constant one-month implied volatility period, however, VXV is designed to reflect the implied volatility of an option with a constant three months to expiration. Since there is only one day on which an option has exactly three months to expiration, VXV is calculated as a weighted average of options expiring immediately before and immediately after the three-month standard. 5 CBOE calculates volatility indexes on other broad-based security indexes, such as the Dow Jones Industrial Average index (“DJX”), the Nasdaq-100 index (“NDX”), and the Russell 2000 index (“RUT”). CBOE may calculate a constant three-month volatility index on DJX, NDX, or RUT in the future. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56821 (November 20, 2007), 72 FR 66210 (November 27, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-82) (“CBOE proposal”). Accordingly, an index calculator would need to use four consecutive expiration months in order to calculate a constant three-month volatility index. Under the current application of NYSE Arca Rule 5.19(a)(3), the Exchange generally lists three consecutive near term months and three months on a quarterly expiration cycle. One of the three consecutive near term months is always a quarterly month; however, that near term contract month (which is also a quarterly month) is not included as part of the three months listed on a quarterly expiration cycle. Therefore, in order to permit the addition of four consecutive near term months under current Rule 5.19(a)(3), the Exchange would only be able to list two months on a quarterly expiration cycle. Because of customer demand and other investment strategy reasons for having three months on a quarterly expiration cycle, the Exchange is seeking to increase, from six to seven, the number of expiration months for broad-based security index options upon which a constant three-month volatility index is calculated. Proposed Rule 5.19(a)(3)(A) will permit the Exchange to list up to seven expiration months at any one time for any broad-based security index option contracts (e.g., NDX, RUT) upon which any exchange calculates a constant three-month volatility index. Without this proposed rule, if a three-month volatility index is calculated using only three consecutive near term months, this would result in the VXV's being calculated with options expiring three months apart about one-third of the time. Another one-third of the time, VXV would be calculated with options expiring two months apart. And the final one-third of the time, VXV would be calculated with options expiring one month apart. As a result, the calculation of the three-month VXV under the current rules would render the VXV subject to inconsistencies that may make the index unattractive as an underlying for volatility products. The proposed rule change will permit the Exchange, eight times a year, to add an additional seventh month in order to maintain four consecutive near term contract months. 6 6 Examples illustrating the need for a seventh month in order to maintain four consecutive near term contract months can be found in the CBOE proposal, *supra* note 5. Therefore, the Exchange believes that the addition of a fourth consecutive near term month for broad-based security index options upon which a constant three-month volatility index is calculated will result in a consistent calculation in which the option series that bracket three months to expiration will always expire one month apart. In order to accommodate the listing of a fourth consecutive near term month and to maintain the listing of three months on a quarterly expiration cycle, the Exchange proposes to increase, from six to seven, the number of expiration months for broad-based security indexes on which a constant three-month volatility index is calculated. The Exchange also proposes making minor technical changes to certain subparagraphs contained in Rule 5.19(a) in order to accommodate the new rule. NYSE Arca has analyzed its capacity and represents that it believes the Exchange and the Options Price Reporting Authority have the necessary systems capacity to handle the additional traffic associated with the additional listing of a seventh contract month in order to maintain four consecutive near term contract months for those broad-based security index options upon which a constant three-month volatility index is calculated. 2. Statutory Basis The proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of section 6 of the Act, 7 in general, and with sections 6(b)(1) and (b)(5) of the Act, 8 in particular, in that the proposal is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. NYSE Arca believes that the proposed rule change is needed to remain competitive with other self-regulatory organizations that have listed the additional option series. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1) and (b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition NYSE Arca does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:

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

(ii)impose any significant burden on competition; and

(iii)become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 9 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 10 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 11 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 12 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay, to permit the Exchange to list options on the Fund immediately. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Commission notes that another self-regulatory organization recently adopted a substantially similar rule change that was effective upon filing, 13 and that this filing raises no new regulatory issues. 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. NYSE Arca has complied with this requirement. 12 *Id.* 13 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57104 (January 4, 2008), 73 FR 2070 (January 11, 2008) (SR-ISE-2007-113). The Commission believes that increasing, from six to seven, the number of expiration months for broad-based security indexes on which an Exchange calculates a constant three-month volatility index (to accommodate a fourth consecutive near-term month while maintaining the listing of three months on a quarterly expiration cycle) will result in a more consistent and predictable calculation in which the option series that bracket three months to expiration will always expire one month apart, thereby promoting just and equitable principles of trade while protecting investors and the public interest. The Commission also notes the Exchange's representations that it possesses the necessary systems capacity to handle the additional traffic associated with the additional listing of a seventh contract month in order to maintain four consecutive near-term contract months for those broad-based security index options upon which the Exchange calculates a constant three-month volatility index. The Commission hereby grants the Exchange's request and designates the proposal as operative upon filing. 14 14 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay of this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-NYSEArca-2008-16 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2008-16. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of NYSE Arca. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2008-16 and should be submitted on or before March 5, 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. E8-2611 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 6095] Announcement of Meetings of the International Telecommunication Advisory Committee *Summary:* This notice announces a meeting of the International Telecommunication Advisory Committee

(ITAC)to prepare advice on the World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly 2008 (WTSA 08). The ITAC will meet to prepare advice for the U.S. on preparations for the World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly 2008 (WTSA 08) including positions on cybersecurity, study program restructuring, and leadership on Tuesday afternoon February 26, 2008 2- 4 p.m. EST in the Washington, DC metro area. Meeting details and detailed agendas will be posted on the mailing list *itac@eblist.state.gov* . People desiring to participate on this list may apply to the secretariat at *minardje@state.gov* . The meeting is open to the public. Dated: February 4, 2008. James G. Ennis, International Communications & Information Policy, Department of State. [FR Doc. E8-2654 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-07-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 6072] Overseas Security Advisory Council

(OSAC)Meeting Notice; Closed Meeting The Department of State announces a meeting of the U.S. State Department—Overseas Security Advisory Council on February 28, 2008 at the Boeing Company, Arlington, Virginia. Pursuant to section 10

(d)of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4) and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(7)(E), it has been determined that the meeting will be closed to the public. The meeting will focus on an examination of corporate security policies and procedures and will involve extensive discussion of proprietary commercial information that is considered privileged and confidential, and will discuss law enforcement investigative techniques and procedures. The agenda will include updated committee reports, a global threat overview, and other matters relating to private sector security policies and protective programs and the protection of U.S. business information overseas. For more information, contact Marsha Thurman, Overseas Security Advisory Council, Department of State, Washington, DC 20522-2008, phone: 571-345-2214. Dated: January 23, 2008. Patrick D. Donovan, Director of the Diplomatic Security Service, Acting Department of State. [FR Doc. E8-2653 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-43-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 6079] Shipping Coordinating Committee; Notice of Meeting The Subcommittee for the Prevention of Marine Pollution of the Shipping Coordinating Committee

(SHC)will conduct an open meeting at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, March 12, 2008, in Room 2415 of the United States Coast Guard Headquarters Building, 2100 2nd Street SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001. The primary purpose of the meeting is to prepare for the 57th Session of the International Maritime Organization's

(IMO)Marine Environment Protection Committee

(MEPC)to be held by the IMO, at the Royal Horticultural Halls and Conference Centre in London, England from March 31 to April 4, 2008. The primary matters to be considered include: —Harmful aquatic organisms in ballast water; —Recycling of ships; —Prevention of air pollution from ships; —Interpretation and amendments of MARPOL 73/78 and related instruments; —Implementation of the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Cooperation

(OPRC)Convention and the OPRC-Hazardous Noxious Substance (OPRC-HNS) Protocol and relevant conference resolutions; —Identification and protection of Special Areas and Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas; —Inadequacy of reception facilities; —Reports of IMO sub-committees; —Work of other bodies; —Status of IMO Conventions; —Harmful anti-fouling systems for ships; —Promotion of implementation and enforcement of MARPOL 73/78 and related instruments; —Follow-up to the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) and World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD); —Technical co-operation programme; —Role of the human element; —Formal safety assessment; —Work program of the MEPC and subsidiary bodies; —Application of the MEPC's Guidelines; and —Consideration of the report of the MEPC. Please note that hard copies of documents associated with MEPC 57 will not be provided at this meeting. To request documents in electronic format (via e-mail or CD-ROM), please write to the address provided below, or request documents via the following Internet link: *http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/mso/IMOMEPC.htm.* Members of the public may attend this meeting up to the seating capacity of the room. Interested persons may seek information by writing to Lieutenant Heather St. Pierre, Commandant (CG-5224), U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street SW., Room 1601, Washington, DC 20593-0001 or by calling

(202)372-1432. Dated: February 5, 2008. Mark W. Skolnicki, Executive Secretary, Shipping Coordinating Committee, Department of State. [FR Doc. E8-2649 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-09-P TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Meetings; Sunshine Act Agency Holding the Meeting: Tennessee Valley Authority (Meeting No. 08-01). Time and Date: 11 a.m. EST, February 15, 2008, TVA Chattanooga Office Complex, 1101 Market Street, Chattanooga, Tennessee. Agenda Old Business Approval of minutes of November 29, 2007, Board Meeting. New Business 1. Chairman's Report A. Ad Hoc Committee on energy efficiency, demand response, and renewable energy B. Report on committee memberships 2. President's Report 3. Report of the Finance, Strategy, and Rates Committee C. Customer issues i. Rate adjustment ii. Renewable portfolio compliance for customers iii. Seven States (customer-owned generation) 4. Report of the Operations, Environment, and Safety Committee A. Radiological waste processing contract 5. Report of the Audit and Ethics Committee 6. Report of the Community Relations Committee A. Appointment to Regional Resource Stewardship Council 7. Report of the Corporate Governance Committee A. Amendments to TVA Bylaws B. TVA Board Practice on Approval of Settlements of Claims and Litigation C. TVA Board Practice on Board Member Continuing Education Opportunities D. Election of Chair 8. Ike Zeringue Engineer of the Year Award. FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: TVA Media Relations at

(865)632-6000, Knoxville, Tennessee. People who plan to attend the meeting and have special needs should call

(865)632-6000. Anyone who wishes to comment on any of the agenda in writing may send their comments to: TVA Board of Directors, Board Agenda Comments, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902. Dated: February 8, 2008. Ralph E. Rodgers, Assistant General Counsel and Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. 08-676 Filed 2-11-08; 9:49 am]

Connectionstraces to 31

Traces to 31 documents

U.S. Code

CFR

13 references not yet in our index

5 CFR 1320.10
26 USC 2813
29 CFR 1912.3(a)
29 CFR 1912.3(c)
29 CFR 1912.3(b)
29 CFR 1912
41 CFR 101
29 CFR 1912.3(e)
10 CFR 72
10 CFR 73
72 FR 49
10 CFR 2
17 CFR 240.19

Citation graph

cites case law

Notices

30-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Re-instatement and revision of existing collection, Prison Population Reports: Midyear Population Counts and Summary of Sentenced Population Movement—National Prisoner Statistics

Cite5 CFR 1320.10

Cite26 USC 2813

Cite29 CFR 1912.3(a)

Cites 44 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources