Notices. Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment
33,047 words·~150 min read·
/register/2008/02/29/08-885A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
BILLING CODE 9211-03-M NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 52-018 and 52-019] Duke Energy; Acceptance for Docketing of an Application for a Combined License for William States Lee III Units 1 and 2 By letter dated December 12, 2007, as supplemented by a letter dated January 28, 2008, two letters dated February 6, 2008, and a letter dated February 8, 2008, Duke Energy submitted its application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC)for a combined license
(COL)for two AP1000 advanced passive pressurized water reactors in accordance with the requirements contained in 10 CFR 52, “Licenses, Certifications and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants.” These reactors will be identified as William States Lee III Units 1 and 2 and are to be located in Cherokee County, South Carolina. A notice of receipt and availability of this application was previously published in the **Federal Register** (73 FR 6218) on February 1, 2008. The NRC staff has determined that Duke Energy has submitted information in accordance with 10 CFR part 2, “Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings and Issuance of Orders,” and 10 CFR part 52 that is acceptable for docketing. The Docket Numbers established for Units 1 and 2 are 52-018, and 52-019, respectively. The NRC staff will perform a detailed technical review of the application. Docketing of the application does not preclude the NRC from requesting additional information from the applicant as the review proceeds, nor does it predict whether the Commission will grant or deny the application. The Commission will conduct a hearing in accordance with Subpart L, ``Informal Hearing Procedures for NRC Adjudications,” of 10 CFR part 2 and will receive a report on the COL application from the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards in accordance with 10 CFR 52.87, “Referral to the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS).” If the Commission finds that the COL application meets the applicable standards of the Atomic Energy Act and the Commission's regulations, and that required notifications to other agencies and bodies have been made, the Commission will issue a COL, in the form and containing conditions and limitations that the Commission finds appropriate and necessary. In accordance with 10 CFR part 51, the Commission will also prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.26, and as part of the environmental scoping process, the staff intends to hold a public scoping meeting. Detailed information regarding this meeting will be included in a future **Federal Register** notice. Finally, the Commission will announce in a future **Federal Register** notice the opportunity to petition for leave to intervene in the hearing required for this application by 10 CFR 52.85. 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 20852, and will be accessible electronically through the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room link at the NRC Web site *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.* The application is also available at *http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-licensing/col.html.* Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 25th day of February 2008. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Joelle L. Starefos, Senior Project Manager, AP1000 Projects Branch 1, Division of New Reactor Licensing, Office of New Reactors. [FR Doc. E8-3952 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 52-020] AREVA NP, Inc.; Acceptance for Docketing of an Application for Standard Design Certification of the U.S. EPR By letter dated December 11, 2007, as supplemented by letters dated February 7, 2008 and February 20, 2008, AREVA NP Inc. (AREVA) submitted an application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, the Commission) for a standard design certification of the U.S. Evolutionary Power Reactor (EPR). The application was submitted pursuant to section 103 of the Atomic Energy Act and Subpart B, “Standard Design Certifications,” of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 52, “Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants.” A notice of receipt and availability of this application was previously published in the **Federal Register** (73 FR 2286) on January 14, 2008. The NRC staff has determined that AREVA has submitted information in accordance with 10 CFR Part 2, “Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings and Issuance of Orders,” and 10 CFR Part 52 and that the application is acceptable for docketing. The docket number established for this application is 52-020. The NRC staff will perform a detailed technical review of the design certification application. Docketing of the design certification application does not preclude the NRC from requesting additional information from the applicant as the review proceeds, nor does it predict whether the Commission will grant or deny the application. The NRC staff anticipates that a notice relating to the rulemaking pursuant to 10 CFR 52.51 for design certification, including provisions for participation of the public and other parties, will be published in the future. The U.S. EPR design is an approximately 1600 megawatt electric evolutionary pressurized water reactor (PWR). The primary system design, loop configuration, and main components design are similar to those of currently operating PWRs. The U.S. EPR contains unique design features, such as four redundant trains of emergency core cooling; Containment and Shield Building; and a core melt retention system for severe accident mitigation. The U.S. EPR application includes the entire power generation complex, except those elements and features considered site-specific. 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 20852, and will be accessible electronically through the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room link at the NRC Web site *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.* Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* The application is also available at *http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-licensing/design-cert.html.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 25th day of February 2008. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Getachew Tesfaye, Sr. Project Manager, EPR Projects Branch, Division of New Reactor Licensing, Office of New Reactors. [FR Doc. E8-3918 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 030-05215 and 040-06377] Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendments to Byproduct Materials License No. 29-00047-02 and Source Materials License No. SUB-348, for Amendment of the License and Unrestricted Release of the Department of the Army Facilities in Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Betsy Ullrich, Senior Health Physicist, Commercial and R&D Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I, 475 Allendale Road; telephone
(610)337-5040; fax number
(610)337-5269; or by e-mail: *exu@nrc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC)is considering the issuance of license amendments to Byproduct Materials License No. 29-00047-02 and Source Materials License No. SUB-348. These licenses are held by the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command (RDEC), Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC) (the Licensee), for its facilities located at the Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey. Issuance of the amendment would authorize release of Building 167, Magazine 3018, and Bunker 3030 for unrestricted use. The Licensee requested these actions in a letter dated April 28, 2006. The NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment
(EA)in support of the proposed actions in accordance with the requirements of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), part 51 (10 CFR part 51). Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate with respect to the proposed actions. The amendments will be issued to the Licensee following the publication of this FONSI and EA in the **Federal Register** . II. Environmental Assessment Identification of Proposed Action The proposed action would approve the Licensee's April 28, 2006, license amendment requests, resulting in release of Building 167, Magazine 3018 and Bunker 3030 for unrestricted use. License No. 29-00047-02 was issued on August 22, 1956, pursuant to 10 CFR part 30, and has been amended periodically since that time. This license authorized the Licensee to use unsealed and sealed byproduct materials for purposes of conducting research and development activities at its Picatinny Arsenal. License No. SUB-348 was issued on July 13, 1961, pursuant to 10 CFR part 40, and has been amended periodically since that time. This license authorized the Licensee to use uranium and thorium in any form for purposes of conducting research and development activities at its Picatinny Arsenal. The Picatinny Arsenal is situated on 6,500 acres and consists of residential, industrial, office space, laboratories, and specialized facilities. The Picatinny Arsenal is located in a mixed residential and commercial area. Building 167, Magazine 3018, and Bunker 3030 are three of several facilities where use of licensed materials was performed under the authority of RDEC/ARDEC, one of the military tenants at Picatinny Arsenal. Building 167 was a one-story building containing approximately 1,800 square-feet of radioactive materials laboratories and storage areas on the first floor. Radioactive materials were also stored in the basement. Areas outside Building 167 included in the decommissioning activities were a 2 meter by 3 meter area of localized contamination and an 800 square meter area across the street from Building 167 that was used for radioactive waste storage. Magazine 3018 was an explosives magazine in which radiolabelled explosives were stored. Bunker 3030 was a bunker that was once used to store radioactive munitions and was also used for radioactive waste storage. In the late 1990s, the Licensee determined that Building 167, Magazine 3018, and Bunker 3030 were no longer required for licensed activities and initiated a survey and decontamination program. Based on the Licensee's historical knowledge of the site and the conditions of these facilities, the Licensee determined that only routine decontamination activities, in accordance with their NRC-approved, operating radiation safety procedures, were required. The Licensee was not required to submit a decommissioning plan to the NRC because worker cleanup activities and procedures are consistent with those approved for routine operations. The Licensee conducted surveys of Building 167, Magazine 3018, and Bunker 3030 and provided information to the NRC to demonstrate that they meet the criteria in subpart E of 10 CFR part 20 for unrestricted release. Need for the Proposed Action The Licensee has ceased conducting licensed activities in Building 167, Magazine 3018, and Bunker 3030 and seeks the unrestricted use of these buildings. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The historical review of licensed activities conducted in Building 167, Magazine 3018, and Bunker 3030 shows that such activities involved use of the following radionuclides with half-lives greater than 120 days: hydrogen-3, carbon-14, strontium-90, cesium-137, uranium, thorium, radium, and other similar radionuclides. Prior to performing the final status survey, the Licensee conducted decontamination activities, as necessary, in the areas affected by these radionuclides. The Licensee conducted final status surveys during October and November 2001 and June 2002. The surveys covered Building 167 and its associated outdoor areas, Magazine 3018, and Bunker 3030. The final status survey report was attached to the Licensee's amendment request dated April 28, 2006. The Licensee elected to demonstrate compliance with the radiological criteria for unrestricted release as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 by developing derived concentration guideline levels (DCGLs) for its facilities. The Licensee conducted site-specific dose modeling using the default input parameters in RESRAD-BUILD 3.3 for a residential building scenario, and RESRAD 6.3 for soil used by a residential farmer, and performed sensitivity analyses which demonstrate that the proposed DCGLs are conservative estimations of the potential dose at the site and will not exceed the Department of the Army's self-imposed constraint of 15 millirem in a year. The Licensee thus determined the maximum amount of residual radioactivity on building surfaces, equipment, materials, and soils that will satisfy the NRC requirements in subpart E of 10 CFR part 20 for unrestricted release. The NRC reviewed the Licensee's methodology and the DCGLs, and has concluded that the proposed DCGLs are acceptable for use as release criteria for Building 167, Magazine 3018, and Bunker 3030. The Licensee's final status survey results were below these DCGLs, and are thus acceptable. Based on its review, the staff has determined that the affected environment and any environmental impacts associated with the proposed action are bounded by the impacts evaluated by the “Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facilities” (NUREG-1496) Volumes 1-3 (ML042310492, ML042320379, and ML042330385). The staff finds there were no significant environmental impacts from the use of radioactive material at Building 167, Magazine 3018, and Bunker 3030. The NRC staff reviewed the docket file records and the final status survey report to identify any non-radiological hazards that may have impacted the environment surrounding these facilities. No such hazards or impacts to the environment were identified. The NRC has identified no other radiological or non-radiological activities in the area that could result in cumulative environmental impacts. The NRC staff finds that the proposed release of these facilities for unrestricted use and is in compliance with 10 CFR 20.1402 including the impact of residual radioactivity at previously-released site locations of use. Although the Licensee will continue to perform licensed activities at other parts of its Picatinny Arsenal, the Licensee must ensure that these decommissioned areas do not become recontaminated. Before the license can be terminated, the Licensee will be required to show that all previously-released areas comply with the radiological criteria in 10 CFR 20.1402. Based on its review, the staff considered the impact of the residual radioactivity in Building 167, Magazine 3018, and Bunker 3030 and concluded that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action Due to the largely administrative nature of the proposed action, its environmental impacts are small. Therefore, the only alternative the staff considered is the no-action alternative under which the staff would leave things as they are by simply denying the amendment request. This no-action alternative is not feasible because it conflicts with 10 CFR 30.36(d) and 10 CFR 40.42(d), requiring that decommissioning of byproduct material and source material facilities be completed and approved by the NRC after licensed activities cease. The NRC's analysis of the Licensee's final status survey data confirmed that the Building 167, Magazine 3018, and Bunker 3030 meet the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1402 for unrestricted release. Additionally, denying the amendment request would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the no-action alternative are therefore similar, and the no-action alternative is accordingly not further considered. Conclusion The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action is consistent with the NRC's unrestricted release criteria specified in 10 CFR 20.1402. Because the proposed action will not significantly impact the quality of the human environment, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed action is the preferred alternative. Agencies and Persons Consulted NRC provided a draft of this Environmental Assessment to the State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) for review on January 2, 2008. On January 31, 2008, NJDEP responded by letter. The State agreed with the conclusions of the EA, and otherwise had no comments. The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action is of a procedural nature, and will not affect listed species or critical habitat. Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. The NRC staff has also determined that the proposed action is not the type of activity that has the potential to cause effects on historic properties. Therefore, no further consultation is required under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. III. Finding of No Significant Impact The NRC staff has prepared this EA in support of the proposed action. On the basis of this EA, the NRC finds that there are no significant environmental impacts from the proposed action, and that preparation of an environmental impact statement is not warranted. Accordingly, the NRC has determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate. IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, including the application for license amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html* . From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The documents related to this action are listed below, along with their ADAMS accession numbers. 1. Letter dated April 28, 2006 [ML061290093]; 2. New World Technology, Final Report, Picatinny Arsenal Radiological Remediation/Release Surveys and Sampling Project, Revision 3, January 30, 2006, Project No. USA 99-109 [ML061510185 and ML062840673]; 3. Letter dated October 12, 2006 [ML062900446]; 4. Letter dated September 26, 2007 [ML072770684]; 5. NUREG-1757, “Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance;” 6. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E, “Radiological Criteria for License Termination;” 7. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, “Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions;” and 8. NUREG-1496, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facilities.” If you do not have access to ADAMS, or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room
(PDR)Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Dated at King of Prussia, Pennsylvania this 21st day of February 2008. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. James P. Dwyer, Chief, Commercial and R&D Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Region I. [FR Doc. E8-3920 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [EA-08-024] In the Matter of: Licensees Authorized To Possess Radioactive Material Quantities of Concern; Order Imposing Fingerprinting and Criminal History Records Check Requirements for Unescorted Access to Certain Radioactive Material (Effective Immediately) I The Licensees identified in Attachment 1 1 to this Order hold licenses issued in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act
(AEA)of 1954, as amended, by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission), authorizing them to possess items containing radioactive materials in quantities of concern. These materials and the quantities of concern are identified in Attachment 2 to this Order. Section 652 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), which became law on August 8, 2005, amended section 149 of the AEA to require fingerprinting and a Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI)identification and criminal history records check for “any individual who is permitted unescorted access to radioactive materials or other property subject to regulation by the Commission that the Commission determines to be of such significance to the public health and safety or the common defense and security as to warrant fingerprinting and background checks.” Section 149 of the AEA also requires that “all fingerprints obtained by a licensee or applicant * * * shall be submitted to the Attorney General of the United States through the Commission for identification and a criminal history records check.” NRC has decided to implement this requirement, prior to the completion of a future rulemaking, which will implement these provisions of the EPAct, because a deliberate malevolent act by an individual with unescorted access to these radioactive materials has the potential to result in significant adverse impacts to the public health and safety. Individuals or classes of individual listed in 10 CFR 73.61 (72 FR 4945 (February 2, 2007)) are relieved from the fingerprinting and FBI identification and criminal history records check requirements of section 149. Individuals listed in Attachment 3, Paragraph 3 have already satisfied the requirements of section 149 of the AEA and therefore do not need to take additional action. Therefore, as set forth in this Order and in accordance with section 149 of the AEA, as amended by the EPAct, the Commission is imposing additional requirements for unescorted access to certain radioactive material. 1 Attachment 1 contains sensitive information and will not be released to the public. II Subsequent to the terrorist events of September 11, 2001, the NRC issued the Increased Controls
(IC)Orders (EA-05-090) 2 to certain Licensees (IC Licensees, Licensees) who are authorized to possess radioactive material in quantities of concern. These Orders increased the Licensees' control over their sources in order to prevent unintended radiation exposure and malicious acts. One specific requirement imposed by the IC Orders required Licensees to conduct background checks to determine the trustworthiness and reliability of individuals needing unescorted access to radioactive materials. “Access” to these radioactive materials means that an individual could exercise some physical control over the material or devices containing the material. Prior to the enactment of the EPAct, the NRC did not have the authority, except in the case of power reactor Licensees, to require Licensees to submit fingerprints for FBI identification and criminal history records checks of individuals being considered for unescorted access to radioactive materials subject to NRC regulations. The Commission has determined that radioactive materials possessed by IC Licensees are considered of such significance to the public health and safety as to warrant fingerprinting and FBI identification and criminal history records checks for such persons. Therefore, in accordance with section 149 of the AEA, as amended by the EPAct, the Commission is imposing the fingerprinting and FBI identification and criminal history records check requirements, as set forth in this Order, including those requirements identified in Attachment 3 to this Order on all IC Licensees identified in Attachment 1 to this Order, which are currently authorized to possess radioactive materials in quantities of concern. These requirements will remain in effect until the Commission determines otherwise. 2 Subsequently, the IC Order requirements were imposed through license condition on new or amended NRC licenses authorizing the possession of radioactive materials in quantities of concern as identified in Attachment 2 to this Order. In addition, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, because of the potentially significant adverse impacts associated with a deliberate malevolent act by an individual with unescorted access to radioactive materials quantities of concern, I find that the public health and safety require that this Order be effective immediately. III Accordingly, pursuant to sections 81, 149, 161b, 161i, 161o, 182, and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202, 10 CFR parts 30 and 33, *it is hereby ordered, effective immediately, that all licensees identified in attachment 1 to this order shall comply with the requirements of this order as follows:* A. 1. The Licensee shall, within ninety
(90)days of the date of this Order, establish and maintain a fingerprinting program that meets the requirements of Attachment 3 of this Order for individuals that require unescorted access to certain radioactive materials. 2. Within ninety
(90)days of the date of this Order, the Licensee shall provide under oath or affirmation, a certification that the Trustworthiness and Reliability (T&R) Official (an individual with the responsibility to determine the trustworthiness and reliability of another individual requiring unescorted access to the radioactive materials identified in Attachment 2) is deemed trustworthy and reliable by the Licensee as required in paragraph B.2 of this Order. 3. The Licensee shall, in writing, within sixty
(60)days of the date of this Order, notify the Commission,
(1)if it is unable to comply with any of the requirements described in this Order or in Attachment 3 to this Order,
(2)if compliance with any of the requirements is unnecessary in its specific circumstances, or
(3)if implementation of any of the requirements would cause the Licensee to be in violation of the provisions of any Commission regulation or its license. The notification shall provide the Licensee's justification for seeking relief from or variation of any specific requirement. 4. The Licensee shall complete implementation of the program established in accordance with paragraph A.1 of this Order by August 19, 2008. In addition to the notifications in paragraphs 2 and 3 above, the Licensee shall notify the Commission within twenty-five
(25)days after they have achieved full compliance with the requirements described in Attachment 3 to this Order. If by August 19, 2008, the Licensee is unable, due to circumstances beyond its control, to complete implementation of this Order, the Licensee shall submit a written request to the Commission explaining the need for an extension of time to implement the requirements. The request shall provide the Licensee's justification for seeking more time to comply with the requirements of this Order. 5. Licensees shall notify the NRC's Headquarters Operations Office at 301-816-5100 within 24 hours if the results from a FBI identification and criminal history records check indicate that an individual is identified on the FBI's Terrorist Screening Data Base. B. 1. Except as provided in paragraph E for individuals who are currently approved for unescorted access, the Licensee shall grant access to radioactive material in Attachment 2 in accordance with the requirements of IC.1. of the Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090) and the requirements of this Order. 2. The T&R Official, if he/she does not require unescorted access, must be deemed trustworthy and reliable by the Licensee in accordance with the requirements of IC.1. of the Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090) before making a determination regarding the trustworthiness and reliability of another individual. If the T&R Official requires unescorted access, the Licensee must consider the results of fingerprinting and the review of an FBI identification and criminal history records check as a component in approving a T&R Official. C. Prior to requesting fingerprints from any individual, the Licensee shall provide a copy of this Order to that person. D. Upon receipt of the results of FBI identification and criminal history records checks, the Licensee shall control such information as specified in the “Protection of Information” section of Attachment 3 of this Order and in requirement IC.5 of the Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090). E. The Licensee shall make determinations on continued unescorted access for persons currently granted unescorted access, by August 19, 2008, based upon the results of the fingerprinting and FBI identification and criminal history records check. The Licensee may allow any individual who currently has unescorted access to certain radioactive materials in accordance with the IC Order to continue to have unescorted access, pending a decision by the T&R Official. After August 19, 2008, no individual may have unescorted access to radioactive materials without a determination by the T&R Official (based upon fingerprinting, an FBI identification and criminal history records check and a previous trustworthiness and reliability determination) that the individual may have unescorted access to such materials. F. 1. The Licensee shall comply with and to the extent the recipient of this Order is also the recipient of the Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090), paragraph IC 1.b is superceded by the following: For individuals employed by the licensee for three years or less, and for non-licensee personnel, such as physicians, physicists, house-keeping personnel, and security personnel under contract, trustworthiness and reliability shall be determined, at a minimum, by verifying employment history, education, personal references, and fingerprinting and the review of an FBI identification and criminal history records check. The licensee shall also, to the extent possible, obtain independent information to corroborate that provided by the employee (i.e. seeking references not supplied by the individual). For individuals employed by the licensee for longer than three years, trustworthiness and reliability shall be determined, at a minimum, by a review of the employees' employment history with the licensee and fingerprinting and an FBI identification and criminal history records check. 2. The Licensee shall comply with and to the extent the recipient of this Order is also the recipient of Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090), Paragraph IC 1.c of that prior Order is superceded by, the following: Service provider licensee employees shall be escorted unless determined to be trustworthy and reliable by an NRC-required background investigation. Written verification attesting to or certifying the person's trustworthiness and reliability shall be obtained from the licensee providing the service. 3. For Licensees who have previously received the Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090), “Table 1: Radionuclides of Concern” is superseded by Attachment 2 to include Ra-226. The previous Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090) will, therefore, also apply to Ra-226 as noted in Attachment 2. Licensee responses to A.1, A.2., A.3. and A.4., above shall be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Licensee responses shall be marked as “Security-Related Information—Withhold Under 10 CFR 2.390.” The Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, may, in writing, relax or rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration of good cause by the Licensee. IV In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the Licensee must, and any other person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an answer to this Order within thirty
(30)days of the date of this Order. In addition, the Licensee and any other person adversely affected by this Order may request a hearing of this Order within thirty
(30)days of the date of the Order. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the time to request a hearing. A request for extension of time must be made, in writing, to the Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and include a statement of good cause for the extension. The answer may consent to this Order. If the answer includes a request for a hearing, it shall, under oath or affirmation, specifically set forth the matters of fact and law on which the Licensee relies and the reasons as to why the Order should not have been issued. If a person other than the Licensee requests a hearing, that person shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his interest is adversely affected by this Order and shall address the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d). A request for a hearing must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing Rule, which became effective on October 15, 2007. The E-Filing Final Rule was issued on August 28, 2007, (72 FR 49,139). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve documents over the internet or, in some cases, to mail copies on electronic optical storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek a waiver in accordance with the procedures described below. To comply with the procedural requirements associated with E-Filing, at least five
(5)days prior to the filing deadline the requestor must contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at *HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV,* or by calling
(301)415-1677, to request
(1)A digital ID certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any NRC proceeding in which it is participating; and/or
(2)creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances when the requestor (or its counsel or representative) already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Each requestor will need to download the Workplace Forms Viewer TM to access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the E-Filing system. The Workplace Forms Viewer TM is free and is available at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-viewer.html.* Information about applying for a digital ID certificate also is available on NRC's public Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html.* Once a requestor has obtained a digital ID certificate, had a docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, it can then submit a request for a hearing through EIE. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format
(PDF)in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC public Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.* A filing is considered complete at the time the filer submits its document through EIE. To be timely, electronic filings must be submitted to the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The EIE system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the document on those participants separately. Therefore, any others who wish to participate in the proceeding (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request is filed so that they may obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system. A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html* or by calling the NRC technical help line, which is available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. The help line number is
(800)397-4209 or locally,
(301)415-4737. Participants who believe that they have good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file a motion, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by
(1)First-class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or
(2)courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at: *http://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp* , unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, or a Presiding Officer. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as Social Security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, Participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their works. If a hearing is requested by the Licensee or a person whose interest is adversely affected, the Commission will issue an Order designating the time and place of any hearing. If a hearing is held the issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Order should be sustained. Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), the Licensee may, in addition to requesting a hearing, at the time the answer is filed or sooner, move the presiding officer to set aside the immediate effectiveness of the Order on the ground that the Order, including the need for immediate effectiveness, is not based on adequate evidence but on mere suspicion, unfounded allegations, or error. In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions specified in section III above shall be final twenty
(20)days from the date of this Order without further order or proceedings. If an extension of time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions specified in section III shall be final when the extension expires if a hearing request has not been received. *An answer or a request for hearing shall not stay the immediate effectiveness of this order.* Dated this 21st day of February, 2008. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Charles L. Miller, Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs. Attachment 1: List of Applicable Materials Licensees Redacted Attachment 2: Table 1: Radionuclides of Concern Table 1.—Radionuclides of Concern Radionuclide Quantity of concern 1
(TBq)Quantity of concern 2
(Ci)Am-241 0.6 16 Am-241/Be 0.6 16 Cf-252 0.2 5.4 Cm-244 0.5 14 Co-60 0.3 8.1 Cs-137 1 27 Gd-153 10 270 Ir-192 0.8 22 Pm-147 400 11,000 Pu-238 0.6 16 Pu-239/Be 0.6 16 Ra-226 5 0.4 11 Se-75 2 54 Sr-90 (Y-90) 10 270 Tm-170 200 5,400 Yb-169 3 81 Combinations of radioactive materials listed above 3 See Footnote Below 4 1 The aggregate activity of multiple, collocated sources of the same radionuclide should be included when the total activity equals or exceeds the quantity of concern. 2 The primary values used for compliance with this Order are TBq. The curie
(Ci)values are rounded to two significant figures for informational purposes only. 3 Radioactive materials are to be considered aggregated or collocated if breaching a common physical security barrier (e.g., a locked door at the entrance to a storage room) would allow access to the radioactive material or devices containing the radioactive material. 4 If several radionuclides are aggregated, the sum of the ratios of the activity of each source, i of radionuclide, n, A <sup>(i,n)</sup> , to the quantity of concern for radionuclide n, Q <sup>(n)</sup> , listed for that radionuclide equals or exceeds one. [(aggregated source activity for radionuclide A) ÷ (quantity of concern for radionuclide A)] + [(aggregated source activity for radionuclide B) ÷ (quantity of concern for radionuclide B)] + etc..... ≥1. 5 On August 31, 2005, the NRC issued a waiver, in accordance to Section 651(e) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, for the continued use and/or regulatory authority of Naturally Occurring and Accelerator-Produced Material (NARM), which includes Ra-226. The NRC plans to terminate the waiver in phases, beginning November 30, 2007, and ending on August 7, 2009. The NRC has authority to regulate discrete sources of Ra-226, but has refrained from exercising that authority until the date of an entity's waiver termination. For entities that possess Ra-226 in quantities of concern, this Order becomes effective upon waiver termination. For information on the schedule for an entity's waiver termination, please refer to the NARM Toolbox Web site at *http://nrc-stp.ornl.gov/narmtoolbox.html.* Attachment 3: Specific Requirements Pertaining to Fingerprinting and Criminal History Records Checks The new fingerprinting requirements supplement previous requirements issued by the Increased Controls Order (EA-05-090). Licensees currently have a program to grant unescorted access to individuals. As required by condition A.1 of the Order, Licensees shall modify its current trustworthiness and reliability program to include the following: 1. Each Licensee subject to the provisions of this attachment shall fingerprint each individual who is seeking or permitted unescorted access to risk significant radioactive materials equal to or greater than the quantities listed in attachment 2. The Licensee shall review and use the information received from the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI)identification and criminal history records check and ensure that the provisions contained in the subject Order and this attachment are satisfied. 2. The Licensee shall notify each affected individual that the fingerprints will be used to secure a review of his/her criminal history record and inform the individual of the procedures for revising the record or including an explanation in the record, as specified in the “Right to Correct and Complete Information” section of this attachment. 3. Fingerprints for unescorted access need not be taken if an employed individual (e.g., a Licensee employee, contractor, manufacturer, or supplier) is relieved from the fingerprinting requirement by 10 CFR 73.61, or any person who has been favorably-decided by a U.S. Government program involving fingerprinting and an FBI identification and criminal history records check (e.g. National Agency Check, Transportation Worker Identification Credentials in accordance with 49 CFR Part 1572, Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives background checks and clearances in accordance with 27 CFR Part 555, Health and Human Services security risk assessments for possession and use of select agents and toxins in accordance with 42 CFR Part 73, Hazardous Material security threat assessment for hazardous material endorsement to commercial drivers license in accordance with 49 CFR Part 1572, Customs and Border Patrol's Free and Secure Trade Program 1 ) within the last five
(5)calendar years, or any person who has an active federal security clearance (provided in the latter two cases that they make available the appropriate documentation 2 ). Written confirmation from the Agency/employer which granted the federal security clearance or reviewed the FBI criminal history records results based upon a fingerprint identification check must be provided. The Licensee must retain this documentation for a period of three
(3)years from the date the individual no longer requires unescorted access to certain radioactive material associated with the Licensee's activities. 1 The FAST program is a cooperative effort between the Bureau of Customs and Border Patrol and the governments of Canada and Mexico to coordinate processes for the clearance of commercial shipments at the U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico borders. Participants in the FAST program, which requires successful completion of a background records check, may receive expedited entrance privileges at the northern and southern borders. 2 This documentation must allow the T&R Official to verify that the individual has fulfilled the unescorted access requirements of Section 149 of the AEA by submitting to fingerprinting and an FBI identification and criminal history records check. 4. All fingerprints obtained by the Licensee pursuant to this Order must be submitted to the Commission for transmission to the FBI. Additionally, the Licensee shall submit a certification of the trustworthiness and reliability of the T&R Official as determined in accordance with paragraph B.2 of this Order. 5. The Licensee shall review the information received from the FBI and consider it, in conjunction with the trustworthiness and reliability requirements of the IC Order (EA-05-090), in making a determination whether to grant unescorted access to certain radioactive materials. 6. The Licensee shall use any information obtained as part of a criminal history records check solely for the purpose of determining an individual's suitability for unescorted access to risk significant radioactive materials equal to or greater than the quantities listed in attachment 2. 7. The Licensee shall document the basis for its determination whether to grant, or continue to allow unescorted access to risk significant radioactive materials equal to or greater than the quantities listed in attachment 2. Prohibitions A Licensee shall not base a final determination to deny an individual unescorted access to certain radioactive material solely on the basis of information received from the FBI involving: an arrest more than one
(1)year old for which there is no information of the disposition of the case, or an arrest that resulted in dismissal of the charge or an acquittal. A Licensee shall not use information received from a criminal history check obtained pursuant to this Order in a manner that would infringe upon the rights of any individual under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, nor shall the Licensee use the information in any way which would discriminate among individuals on the basis of race, religion, national origin, sex, or age. Right To Correct and Complete Information Prior to any final adverse determination, the Licensee shall make available to the individual the contents of any criminal records obtained from the FBI for the purpose of assuring correct and complete information. Written confirmation by the individual of receipt of this notification must be maintained by the Licensee for a period of one
(1)year from the date of the notification. If, after reviewing the record, an individual believes that it is incorrect or incomplete in any respect and wishes to change, correct, or update the alleged deficiency, or to explain any matter in the record, the individual may initiate challenge procedures. These procedures include either direct application by the individual challenging the record to the agency (i.e., law enforcement agency) that contributed the questioned information, or direct challenge as to the accuracy or completeness of any entry on the criminal history record to the Assistant Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation Identification Division, Washington, DC 20537-9700 (as set forth in 28 CFR part 16.30 through 16.34). In the latter case, the FBI forwards the challenge to the agency that submitted the data and requests that agency to verify or correct the challenged entry. Upon receipt of an Official communication directly from the agency that contributed the original information, the FBI Identification Division makes any changes necessary in accordance with the information supplied by that agency. The Licensee must provide at least ten
(10)days for an individual to initiate an action challenging the results of an FBI identification and criminal history records check after the record is made available for his/her review. The Licensee may make a final unescorted access to certain radioactive material determination based upon the criminal history record only upon receipt of the FBI's ultimate confirmation or correction of the record. Upon a final adverse determination on unescorted access to certain radioactive material, the Licensee shall provide the individual its documented basis for denial. Unescorted access to certain radioactive material shall not be granted to an individual during the review process. Protection of Information 1. Each Licensee who obtains a criminal history record on an individual pursuant to this Order shall establish and maintain a system of files and procedures for protecting the record and the personal information from unauthorized disclosure. 2. The Licensee may not disclose the record or personal information collected and maintained to persons other than the subject individual, his/her representative, or to those who have a need to access the information in performing assigned duties in the process of determining unescorted access to certain radioactive material. No individual authorized to have access to the information may re-disseminate the information to any other individual who does not have a need-to-know. 3. The personal information obtained on an individual from a criminal history record check may be transferred to another Licensee if the Licensee holding the criminal history record check receives the individual's written request to re-disseminate the information contained in his/her file, and the gaining Licensee verifies information such as the individual's name, date of birth, social security number, sex, and other applicable physical characteristics for identification purposes. 4. The Licensee shall make criminal history records, obtained under this section, available for examination by an authorized representative of the NRC to determine compliance with the regulations and laws. 5. The Licensee shall retain all fingerprint and criminal history records from the FBI, or a copy if the individual's file has been transferred, for three
(3)years after termination of employment or determination of unescorted access to certain radioactive material (whether unescorted access was approved or denied). After the required three
(3)year period, these documents shall be destroyed by a method that will prevent reconstruction of the information in whole or in part. [FR Doc. E8-3921 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE Generalized System of Preferences (GSP): Notice Regarding Extension of Deadline To Receive Comments on the Child Labor Review in the Production of Certain GSP-Eligible Hand-Loomed Carpets AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: On January 18, 2008, a public notice was published in the **Federal Register** on pages 3495-3496 requesting public comments by February 15, 2008, on whether each beneficiary country exporting certain hand-loomed carpets is taking steps to eliminate the worst forms of child labor, including the use of bonded child labor, in the production of certain carpets imported under the U.S. GSP program. The GSP Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee has decided to extend the deadline to March 14, 2008, for receipt of public comments for this review. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The GSP Subcommittee of the TPSC, Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), 1724 F Street, NW., Room F-220, Washington, DC 20508. The telephone number is
(202)395-6971. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 2004 Miscellaneous Trade and Technical Corrections Act (HR 1047) (the “2004 Act”), as approved by Congress, authorized the President to designate seven tariff lines relating to carpets (5702.51.20 (now 5702.50.20), 5702.91.30, 5702.92.00 (now 5702.92.10), 5702.99.10 (now 5702.99.05), 5703.10.00 (now 5703.10.20), 5703.20.10, and 5703.30.00 (now 5703.30.20)) as eligible for duty-free treatment under the GSP program. These tariff lines cover certain hand-loomed carpets and other textile floor coverings made of wool, cotton, fine animal hair, or man-made textile materials. Pursuant to the authorization in the 2004 Act, the President designated these seven tariff lines as eligible for duty-free treatment under the GSP program. The GSP Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee
(TPSC)is conducting a triennial review of whether each beneficiary country is taking steps to eliminate the worst forms of child labor, including the use of bonded child labor, in the production of such carpets imported under the U.S. GSP program. If sufficient steps are not underway, the TPSC will recommend to the President changes in GSP coverage that would eliminate from duty-free treatment under the GSP program those carpets found to be made with the worst forms of child labor. For further information, please refer to the USTR FR Doc. E8-905, page 3495-3496, **Federal Register** Notice, dated January 18, 2008, Vol. 73 FR 3485: Notice Regarding the Initiation of Child Labor Review in the Production of Certain GSP-Eligible Hand-Loomed or Hand-Hooked Carpets., No. 13/Friday, January 18, 2008. *Opportunities for Public Comment and Inspection of Comments:* The GSP Subcommittee of the TPSC invites comments for this review. Submissions should comply with 15 CFR Part 2007, except as modified below. All submissions should identify the subject article(s) in terms of the country and the eight-digit Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States subheading number. The deadline for submission of comments is extended until March 14, 2008. *Requirements for Submissions:* In order to facilitate prompt processing of submissions, USTR requires electronic e-mail submissions in response to this notice. Hand-delivered submissions will not be accepted. These submissions should be single-copy transmissions in English, and including attachments, with the total submission not to exceed 25 single-spaced standard letter-size pages in 12-point type and three megabytes as sent as a digital file attached to an e-mail transmission. E-mail submissions should use the following subject line: “Child Labor Review in the Production of Certain GSP-Eligible Hand-loomed or Hand-hooked Carpet Lines” followed by the country and the eight-digit HTSUS subheading number. Documents must be submitted in English in one of the following formats: WordPerfect (.WPD), Adobe (.PDF), MSWord (.DOC), or text (.TXT) files. Documents cannot be submitted as electronic image files or contain embedded images, e.g., “.JPG”, “.TIF”, “.BMP”, or “.GIF”. Supporting documentation submitted as spreadsheets are acceptable as Excel files, formatted for printing on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper. To the extent possible, any data attachments to the submission should be included in the same file as the submission itself, and not as separate files. If the submission contains business confidential information, a non-confidential version of the submission must also be submitted that indicates where confidential information was redacted by inserting asterisks where material was deleted. In addition, the confidential submission must be clearly marked “BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL” at the top and bottom of each page of the document. The non-confidential version must also be clearly marked at the top and bottom of each page (either “PUBLIC VERSION” or “NON-CONFIDENTIAL”). Documents that are submitted without any marking might not be accepted or will be considered public documents. For any document containing business confidential information submitted as an electronic attached file to an e-mail transmission, the file name of the business confidential version should begin with the characters “BC-”, and the file name of the public version should begin with the characters “P-”. The “P-” or “BC-” should be followed by the name of the party (government, company, union, association, etc.) which is making the submission. E-mail submissions should not include separate cover letters or messages in the message area of the e-mail; information that might appear in any cover letter should be included directly in the attached file containing the submission itself, including the sender's name, organization name, address, telephone number and e-mail address. The e-mail address for these submissions is *FR0081@USTR.EOP.GOV* . **Note:** The letters “FR” in the e-mail address are followed by the number, zero, not a letter. Documents not submitted in accordance with these instructions might not be considered in this review. If unable to provide submissions by e-mail, please contact the GSP Subcommittee to arrange for an alternative method of transmission. Public versions of all documents relating to this review will be available for review approximately two weeks after the relevant due date by appointment in the USTR public reading room, 1724 F Street, NW., Washington, DC. Appointments may be made from 9:30 a.m. to noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, by calling
(202)395-6186. Marideth J. Sandler, Executive Director, Generalized System of Preferences, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. [FR Doc. E8-3925 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190-W8-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Investment Company Act Release No. 28168; 812-13367] Kohlberg Capital Corporation; Notice of Application February 25, 2008. AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”). ACTION: Notice of an application for an order under section 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) for an exemption from sections 23(a), 23(b) and 63 of the Act, and under sections 57(a)(4) and 57(i) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act permitting certain joint transactions otherwise prohibited by section 57(a)(4) of the Act. *Summary of the Application:* Applicant, Kohlberg Capital Corporation (“Kohlberg Capital”) requests an order to permit it to issue restricted shares of its common stock to its officers and employees under the terms of its equity incentive plan. *Filing Dates:* The application was filed on February 27, 2007, and amended on February 13, 2008 and February 22, 2008. Applicants have agreed to file an amendment during the notice period, the substance of which is reflected in this notice. *Hearing or Notification of Hearing:* An order granting the application will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary and serving applicant with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on March 21, 2008, and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicant, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary. ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicant, 295 Madison Avenue, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10017. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bruce R. MacNeil, Senior Counsel, at
(202)551-6817, or Julia Kim Gilmer, Branch Chief, at
(202)551-6821, (Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company Regulation). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee at the Commission's Public Reference Desk, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1520 (tel. 202-551-5850). Applicant's Representations 1. Kohlberg Capital, a Delaware corporation, is an internally managed, non-diversified, closed-end investment company that has elected to be regulated as a business development company (“BDC”) under the Act. 1 Kohlberg Capital provides debt and equity growth capital to privately-held middle market companies and its investment objective is to generate current income and capital appreciation from the investments made by those companies in senior secured term loans, mezzanine debt and selected equity investments. Kohlberg Capital may also invest in loans to larger, publicly traded companies, high-yield bonds, distressed debt securities and debt and equity securities issued by collateralized debt obligation funds. Shares of Kohlberg Capital's common stock are traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “KCAP.” As of September 30, 2007, there were 17, 997,611 shares of Kohlberg Capital's common stock outstanding. As of that date, Kohlberg Capital had 26 employees, including the employees of its wholly-owned consolidated subsidiaries. 2 1 Kohlberg Capital was organized on August 8, 2006. On December 4, 2006, Kohlberg Capital filed with the Commission its registration statement on Form N-2 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, in connection with its initial public offering of common stock (the “IPO”). On December 5, 2006, Kohlberg Capital elected to be regulated as a BDC. Section 2(a)(48) defines a BDC to be any closed-end investment company that operates for the purpose of making investments in securities described in sections 55(a)(1) through 55(a)(3) of the Act and makes available significant managerial assistance with respect to the issuers of such securities. Kohlberg Capital completed its IPO on December 15, 2006. 2 Kohlberg Capital does not currently have any wholly-owned consolidated subsidiaries. 2. Kohlberg Capital currently has a seven-member board of directors (the “Board”) of whom three are “interested persons” of Kohlberg Capital within the meaning of section 2(a)(19) of the Act and four are not interested persons (the “non-interested directors”). The four non-interested directors are neither employees nor officers of Kohlberg Capital (“Non-employee Directors”). Currently, Kohlberg Capital's Non-employee Directors are all non-interested Directors, but it is possible that Kohlberg Capital may have Non-employee Directors in the future who are interested persons of Kohlberg Capital. 3. Kohlberg Capital believes that its successful operation depends on its ability to offer compensation packages to its professionals that are competitive with those offered by its competitors. Kohlberg Capital believes its ability to adopt a compensation plan providing for the periodic issuance of shares of restricted stock ( *i.e.* , stock that, at the time of issuance, is subject to certain forfeiture restrictions, and thus is restricted as to its transferability until such forfeiture restrictions have lapsed) (the “Restricted Stock”) is vital to its future growth and success. Kohlberg Capital wishes to adopt an equity-based compensation plan (the “Plan”) for its officers and employees (“Employees”), as well as employees of its wholly owned consolidated subsidiaries (together with the Employees, the “Participants”). 4. The Plan will authorize the issuance of shares of Restricted Stock subject to certain forfeiture restrictions. These restrictions may relate to continued employment, the performance of Kohlberg Capital, or other restrictions deemed by the Board to be appropriate. The Restricted Stock will be subject to restrictions on transferability and other restrictions as required by the Board. Except to the extent restricted under the terms of the Plan, a Participant granted Restricted Stock will have all the rights of any other shareholder, including the right to vote the Restricted Stock and the right to receive dividends. During the restriction period, the Restricted Stock generally may not be sold, transferred, pledged, hypothecated, margined, or otherwise encumbered by the Participant. Except as the Board otherwise determines, upon termination of a Participant's employment during the applicable restriction period, Restricted Stock for which forfeiture restrictions have not lapsed at the time of such termination shall be forfeited. 5. The maximum amount of Restricted Stock that may be issued under the Plan will be 10% of the outstanding shares of Kohlberg Capital's common stock on the effective date of the Plan plus 10% of the outstanding shares of Kohlberg Capital's common stock issued or delivered by Kohlberg Capital (other than pursuant to compensation plans) during the term of the Plan. 3 The Plan limits the total number of shares that may be awarded to any single Participant in a single year to 500,000 shares. In addition, no Restricted Stock Participant may be granted more than 25% of the shares reserved for issuance under the Plan. The Plan will be administered by the Board, which will award shares of Restricted Stock to the Participants from time to time as part of the Participants' compensation based on a Participant's actual or expected performance and value to Kohlberg Capital. 3 For purposes of calculating compliance with this limit, Kohlberg Capital will count as Restricted Stock all shares of its common stock that are issued pursuant to the Plan less any shares that are forfeited back to Kohlberg Capital and cancelled as a result of forfeiture restrictions not lapsing. 6. Each issuance of Restricted Stock under the Plan will be approved by the required majority, as defined in section 57(o) of the Act, 4 of Kohlberg Capital's directors on the basis that the issuance is in the best interests of Kohlberg Capital and its shareholders. The date on which the required majority approves an issuance of Restricted Stock will be deemed the date on which the subject Restricted Stock is granted. 4 The term “required majority,” when used with respect to the approval of a proposed transaction, plan, or arrangement, means both a majority of a BDC's directors or general partners who have no financial interest in such transaction, plan, or arrangement and a majority of such directors or general partners who are not interested persons of such company. 7. The Plan was approved by the Board on February 5, 2008, including by a majority of the non-interested directors and the required majority as defined in section 57(o) of the Act. The Plan will be submitted for approval to Kohlberg Capital's shareholders, and will become effective upon such approval, subject to and following receipt of the order. Applicant's Legal Analysis Sections 23(a) and (b), Section 63 1. Under section 63 of the Act, the provisions of section 23(a) of the Act generally prohibiting a registered closed-end investment company from issuing securities for services or for property other than cash or securities are made applicable to BDCs. This provision would prohibit the issuance of Restricted Stock as a part of the Plan. 2. Section 23(b) generally prohibits a closed-end management investment company from selling its common stock at a price below its current net asset value (“NAV”). Section 63(2) makes section 23(b) applicable to BDCs unless certain conditions are met. Because Restricted Stock that would be granted under the Plan would not meet the terms of section 63(2), sections 23(b) and 63 prohibit the issuance of the Restricted Stock. 3. Section 6(c) provides that the Commission may, by order upon application, conditionally or unconditionally exempt any person, security, or transaction, or any class or classes of persons, securities or transactions, from any provision of the Act, if and to the extent that the exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. 4. Kohlberg Capital requests an order pursuant to section 6(c) of the Act granting an exemption from the provisions of sections 23(a) and
(b)and section 63 of the Act. Kohlberg Capital states that the concerns underlying those sections include:
(a)Preferential treatment of investment company insiders and the use of options and other rights by insiders to obtain control of the investment company;
(b)complication of the investment company's structure that makes it difficult to determine the value of the company's shares; and
(c)dilution of shareholders' equity in the investment company. Kohlberg Capital states that the Plan does not raise the concern about preferential treatment of Kohlberg Capital's insiders because the Plan is bona fide compensation plan of the type that is common among corporations generally. In addition, section 61(a)(3)(B) of the Act permits a BDC to issue to its officers, directors and employees, pursuant to an executive compensation plan, warrants, options and rights to purchase the BDC's voting securities, subject to certain requirements. Kohlberg Capital states that, for reasons that are unclear, section 61 and its legislative history do not address the issuance by a BDC of restricted stock as incentive compensation. Kohlberg Capital states, however, that the issuance of Restricted Stock is substantially similar, for purposes of investor protection under the Act, to the issuance of warrants, options, and rights as contemplated by section 61. Kohlberg Capital also asserts that the Plan would not become a means for insiders to obtain control of Kohlberg Capital because the number of shares of Kohlberg Capital issuable under the Plan would be limited as set forth in the application. Moreover, no individual Restricted Stock Participant could be issued more than 25% of the shares reserved for issuance under the Plan. 5. Kohlberg Capital further states that the Plan will not unduly complicate Kohlberg Capital's capital structure because equity-based compensation arrangements are widely used among corporations and commonly known to investors. Kohlberg Capital notes that the Plan will be submitted to its shareholders for their approval. Kohlberg Capital represents that a concise, “plain English” description of the Plan, including its potential dilutive effect, will be provided in the proxy materials that will be submitted to Kohlberg Capital's shareholders. Kohlberg Capital also states that it will comply with the proxy disclosure requirements in Item 10 of Schedule 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). Kohlberg Capital further notes that the Plan will be disclosed to investors in accordance with the requirements of the Form N-2 registration statement for closed-end investment companies, and pursuant to the standards and guidelines adopted by the Financial Accounting Standards Board for operating companies. In addition, Kohlberg Capital will comply with the disclosure requirements for executive compensation plans applicable to operating companies under the Exchange Act. 5 Kohlberg Capital thus concludes that the Plan will be adequately disclosed to investors and appropriately reflected in the market value of Kohlberg Capital's shares. 5 Kohlberg Capital will comply with the amendments to the disclosure requirements for executive and director compensation, related party transactions, director independence and other corporate governance matters, and security ownership of officers and directors to the extent adopted and applicable to BDCs. *See* Executive Compensation and Related Party Disclosure, Securities Act Release No. 8655 (Jan. 27, 2006) (proposed rule); Executive Compensation and Related Party Disclosure, Securities Act Release No. 8732A (Aug. 29, 2006) (final rule and proposed rule), as amended by Executive Compensation Disclosure, Securities Act Release No. 8765 (Dec. 22, 2006) (adopted as interim final rules with request for comments). 6. Kohlberg Capital acknowledges that, while awards granted under the Plan would have a dilutive effect on the shareholders' equity in Kohlberg Capital, that effect would be outweighed by the anticipated benefits of the Plan to Kohlberg Capital and its shareholders. Kohlberg Capital asserts that it needs the flexibility to provide the requested equity-based employee compensation in order to be able to compete effectively with other financial services firms for talented professionals. These professionals, Kohlberg Capital suggests, in turn are likely to increase Kohlberg Capital's performance and shareholder value. Kohlberg Capital also asserts that equity-based compensation would more closely align the interests of Kohlberg Capital's Employees with those of its shareholders. In addition, Kohlberg Capital states that its shareholders will be further protected by the conditions to the requested order that assure continuing oversight of the operation of the Plan by Kohlberg Capital's Board. Section 57(a)(4), Rule 17d-1 7. Section 57(a) proscribes certain transactions between a BDC and persons related to the BDC in the manner described in section 57(b) (“57(b) persons”), absent a Commission order. Section 57(a)(4) generally prohibits a 57(b) person from effecting a transaction in which the BDC is a joint participant absent such an order. Rule 17d-1, made applicable to BDCs by section 57(i), proscribes participation in a “joint enterprise or other joint arrangement or profit-sharing plan,” which includes a stock option or purchase plan. Employees and directors of a BDC are 57(b) persons. Thus, the issuance of shares of Restricted Stock could be deemed to involve a joint transaction involving a BDC and a 57(b) person in contravention of section 57(a)(4). Rule 17d-1(b) provides that, in considering relief pursuant to the rule, the Commission will consider
(i)whether the participation of the company in a joint enterprise is consistent with the Act's policies and purposes and
(ii)the extent to which that participation is on a basis different from or less advantageous than that of other participants. 8. Kohlberg Capital requests an order pursuant to section 57(a)(4) and rule 17d-1 to permit the Plan. Kohlberg Capital states that the Plan, although benefiting the Participants and Kohlberg Capital in different ways, are in the interests of Kohlberg Capital's shareholders because the Plan will help Kohlberg Capital attract and retain talented professionals, help align the interests of Kohlberg Capital's employees with those of its shareholders, and in turn help produce a better return to Kohlberg Capital's shareholders. Applicant's Conditions Applicant agrees that the order granting the requested relief will be subject to the following conditions: 1. The Plan will be authorized by Kohlberg Capital's shareholders. 2. Each issuance of Restricted Stock to an Employee will be approved by the required majority, as defined in section 57(o) of the Act, of Kohlberg Capital's directors on the basis that such issuance is in the best interest of Kohlberg Capital and its shareholders. 3. The amount of voting securities that would result from the exercise of all of Kohlberg Capital's outstanding warrants, options, and rights, together with any Restricted Stock issued pursuant to the Plan at the time of issuance shall not exceed 25% of the outstanding voting securities of Kohlberg Capital, except that if the amount of voting securities that would result from the exercise of all of Kohlberg Capital's outstanding warrants, options, and rights issued to Kohlberg Capital's directors, officers, and employees, together with any Restricted Stock issued pursuant to the Plan, would exceed 15% of the outstanding voting securities of Kohlberg Capital, then the total amount of voting securities that would result from the exercise of all outstanding warrants, options, and rights, together with any Restricted Stock issued pursuant to the Plan, at the time of issuance shall not exceed 20% of the outstanding voting securities of Kohlberg Capital. 4. The maximum amount of shares of Restricted Stock that may be issued under the Plan will be 10% of the outstanding shares of common stock of Kohlberg Capital on the effective date of the Plan plus 10% of the number of shares of Kohlberg Capital's common stock issued or delivered by Kohlberg Capital (other than pursuant to compensation plans) during the term of the Plan. 5. The Board will review the Plan at least annually. In addition, the Board will review periodically the potential impact that the issuance of Restricted Stock under the Plan could have on Kohlberg Capital's earnings and NAV per share, such review to take place prior to any decisions to grant Restricted Stock under the Plan, but in no event less frequently than annually. Adequate procedures and records will be maintained to permit such review. The Board will be authorized to take appropriate steps to ensure that the grant of Restricted Stock under the Plan would not have an effect contrary to the interests of Kohlberg Capital's shareholders. This authority will include the authority to prevent or limit the granting of additional Restricted Stock under the Plan. All records maintained pursuant to this condition will be subject to examination by the Commission and its staff. For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, pursuant to delegated authority. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-3845 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-57375; File No. SR-ISE-2008-14] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Solicitation of Interest Orders February 22, 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 February 19, 2008, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (“ISE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared substantially by ISE. ISE filed the 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 The ISE is proposing to amend the parameters governing Solicitation of Interest orders (“SOIs”). The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site ( *http://www.ise.com* ), at the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, ISE included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. ISE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of this filing is to amend the parameters governing SOIs that are entered into MidPoint Match (“MPM”). 5 When an SOI order is entered, the System sends Equity Electronic Access Members (“Equity EAMs”) a solicitation notice containing the name of the equity security for which the order was entered. Currently, an SOI order must be at least 2,000 shares and cannot be canceled or changed for five seconds. An immediate-or-cancel (“IOC”) SOI that is not executed within the five second no-cancellation period is automatically canceled. 6 5 *See* ISE Rule 2129 (MidPoint Match). 6 A regular SOI is converted to a Standard Order in MPM if it is not executed or canceled within 10 seconds; *see* ISE Rule 2129(d)(2). The Exchange proposes to reduce the no cancellation parameter to one second. The no cancellation parameter, currently set at five seconds, requires that Equity EAMs using SOIs relinquish the right to cancel or change an SOI order for five seconds. In the current market environment, many potential SOI users are reluctant to commit to a time period of that duration. Instead, Equity EAMs prefer a one second timeout, enabling them to cancel or revise the order in a timeframe that is more consistent with algorithmic trading patterns. Accordingly, an IOC SOI will also time out in one second. Additionally, the Exchange proposes to reduce the minimum order size to 500 shares. The current minimum order size of 2,000 shares is larger than the typical order size generated by algorithms. The Exchange proposes to revise the minimum order size to 500 shares, which is more consistent with algorithmic trading patterns. 2. Statutory Basis The basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is found in Section 6(b) of the Act. 7 Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 8 requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, serve to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism for a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. In particular, this filing will provide investors with more flexibility in entering orders and receiving executions of such orders. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others 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, 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 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). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Commission notes that ISE has satisfied the five-day pre-filing notice requirement. A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing unless the Commission designates a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. 11 The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay set forth in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act. 12 The Commission believes that the earlier operative date is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because it will allow the Exchange to implement the changes to the parameters governing SOIs without delay. For these reasons, the Commission designates the proposal to be operative upon filing with the Commission. 13 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 13 For purposes only of accelerating 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 Number SR-ISE-2008-14 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2008-14. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of ISE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2008-14 and should be submitted on or before March 21, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-3841 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-57367; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-120] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to Market-Makers and Remote Market-Makers February 21, 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 October 11, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. On February 13, 2008, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 Amendment 1 replaced the original filing in its entirety. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change CBOE proposes to amend CBOE rules relating to Market-Makers and Remote Market-Makers (“RMMs”). The text of the rule proposal is available on the Exchange's Web site ( *http://www.cboe.org/legal* ), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose CBOE proposes to amend CBOE rules relating to Market-Makers and RMMs. In particular, CBOE proposes to:
(i)Delete reference to RMMs in its rules;
(ii)amend CBOE Rule 8.3 and CBOE Rule 8.7 relating to the appointment of Market-Makers and Market-Maker obligations, respectively; and
(iii)update or delete outdated provisions in other rules, including CBOE Rule 8.3A relating to Class Quoting Limits (“CQLs”). CBOE proposes to delete CBOE Rule 8.4 and, as a result, individuals and member organizations that are registered as RMMs would be considered Market-Makers under CBOE's rules. 4 RMMs were established in 2005 to allow market participants the ability to stream electronic quotations from a location outside of the physical trading station for an option class. At the time, Market-Makers were restricted from submitting electronic quotations from a location outside of the physical trading station. Over time, CBOE has amended its rules to permit Market-Makers to create a virtual trading crowd appointment and submit electronic quotations away from CBOE's trading floor in a Market-Maker's appointed classes. While on the trading floor, a Market-Maker is not required to be present in the trading station where a class is located in order to stream electronic quotations into the class. 5 4 In connection with this change, CBOE proposes to make related changes to CBOE Rules 3.2, 3.3, 6.45A, 6.45B, 8.7, 8.13, 8.85, and 8.92 which reference the term RMM, and delete Rule 8.61, which pertains to the evaluation of RMMs. 5 *See* CBOE Rule 8.3(c)(vi). The obligations of Market-Makers and RMMs are generally the same, and Market-Makers in Hybrid and Hybrid 2.0 option classes can function remotely if they choose. Additionally, the “appointment costs” and transaction fees of RMMs and Market-Makers are identical. Accordingly, CBOE does not see any reason to continue to maintain a category of market participant called RMM. In connection with the deletion of the reference to RMMs, CBOE proposes to amend the definition of Market-Maker to include member organizations. Currently, an RMM can be either an individual or a member organization. Under CBOE Rule 8.1, however, a Market-Maker is defined as an individual (either a member or a nominee of a member organization) registered with CBOE for the purpose of making transactions as dealer-specialist on CBOE in accordance with the provisions of Chapter VIII. Therefore, CBOE proposes to amend the definition of Market-Maker to include member organizations. CBOE also proposes to amend CBOE Rule 3.3 to clarify that the member organization membership statuses that are approved by the Membership Committee include Market-Maker. 6 6 Interpretation .02 of CBOE Rule 3.3 is also proposed to be amended to include reference to Lead Market-Maker. CBOE also proposes to delete Interpretation and Policy .02 to CBOE Rule 3.8, and amend CBOE Rule 3.8(a)(ii) to allow any member organization that is the owner or lessee of more than one membership to designate one individual to be the nominee for all memberships utilized by the organization. However, for each membership utilized for trading in open outcry on the trading floor, the organization must designate a different individual to be the nominee for each of the memberships. Currently, only RMMs, e-DPMs and Off-Floor DPMs are permitted to designate one individual to be the nominee for all memberships utilized by the organization. CBOE believes it is appropriate to allow any member organization to designate one individual to be the nominee for all memberships utilized by the organization, and if any of the memberships are utilized for trading in open outcry on the trading floor, the organization must designate a different individual to be the nominee for each of the memberships. CBOE also proposes to update and amend CBOE Rule 8.3 pertaining to the appointment of Market-Makers. First, CBOE proposes to amend paragraph
(a)of CBOE Rule 8.3 to provide that appointments can be selected by Market-Makers or made by CBOE consistent with the factors set forth in paragraph (a). Second, CBOE proposes to amend paragraph (c)(ii) to delete the requirement that a Market-Maker may hold an appointment in an appropriate number of Hybrid option classes that are located at one trading station. This limitation which requires that appointments in Hybrid option classes must be located at one trading station is not necessary. Moreover, since all option classes are either Hybrid 2.0 option classes or Hybrid 3.0 option classes, it is irrelevant. Third, CBOE proposes to amend and reorganize paragraph (c)(vii) of CBOE Rule 8.3 pertaining to the two current pilot programs that are in effect, and also to extend for an additional year the pilot programs. Specifically: • Proposed new subparagraph
(1)of CBOE Rule 8.3(c)(vii) describes the existing pilot program which allows an e-DPM or Off-Floor DPM to have one affiliated Market-Maker trade on CBOE's trading floor and submit electronic quotations in any specific option class allocated to the e-DPM or Off-Floor DPM, provided such affiliated Market-Maker trades on a separate membership and is present in the trading crowd ( *see* CBOE Rules 8.85(a)(v) and 8.93(vii)). As noted above, CBOE also proposes to extend for an additional year, until March 14, 2009, this pilot program, as it believes that the pilot program has been successful, and CBOE has not experienced any negative effects with respect to the pilot program. • Proposed new subparagraph
(2)of CBOE Rule 8.3(c)(vii) maintains the existing pilot program which permits an RMM to have one affiliated Market-Maker trade in open outcry and submit electronic quotations in any specific option class in which the Market-Maker holds an appointment, provided such affiliated Market-Maker trades on a separate membership ( *see* CBOE Rule 8.4(c)(i)). However, because CBOE is deleting reference to RMMs, subparagraph
(2)of CBOE Rule 8.3(c)(vii) states that a Market-Maker in a class may have one affiliated Market-Maker trade in open outcry and submit electronic quotations in any specific option class in which the Market-Maker holds an appointment, provided such affiliated Market-Maker trades on a separate membership and is present in the trading crowd. As noted above, CBOE proposes to extend for an additional year, until March 14, 2009, the pilot program, as CBOE believes that it has been successful, and CBOE has not experienced any negative effects with respect to the pilot program. • Proposed new subparagraph
(3)of CBOE Rule 8.3(c)(vii) provides that there is no restriction on
(a)affiliated Market-Makers holding an appointment and submitting electronic quotations in the same class, provided CBOE uses an allocation algorithm in the class that does not allocate electronic trades, in whole or in part, in an equal percentage based on the number of market participants quoting at the best bid or offer; or
(b)affiliated Market-Makers holding an appointment in the same class for purposes of trading in open outcry. • Proposed new subparagraph
(4)of CBOE Rule 8.3(c)(vii) simply restates the multiple aggregation unit pilot program currently applicable to RMMs ( *see* CBOE Rule 8.4(c)(ii)) and Market-Makers ( *see* CBOE Rule 8.3(c)(viii)). CBOE also proposes to extend for an additional year, until March 14, 2009, the pilot program. CBOE believes that the pilot program has been successful, and CBOE has not experienced any negative effects with respect to the pilot program. With regard to the obligations of Market-Makers, CBOE proposes to amend CBOE Rule 8.7 to delete references to RMMs and other outdated references to appointed trading stations. Additionally, CBOE proposes to delete reference to DPMs representing orders as agent in CBOE Rule 8.7(d)(i)(C), as DPMs cannot act as an agent for orders ( *see* Rule 8.85(c)). CBOE also proposes to update CBOE Rule 8.3A pertaining to CQLs. CBOE proposes to amend paragraph
(a)to state that the DPM and e-DPMs (if applicable) assigned to a product and Market-Makers who hold an appointment in the product are entitled to quote electronically in the product for as long as they maintain an appointment in the product. CBOE proposes to amend paragraphs
(b)and
(c)to delete reference to March 18, 2005, and also to provide that any Market-Maker holding an appointment in a product prior to its addition to the Hybrid 2.0 Platform or Hybrid Trading System, respectively, will be entitled to quote electronically in the product. Finally, CBOE proposes to delete existing Interpretation .02, as it is outdated. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the rule proposal is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. 7 Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements under Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 8 that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 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 not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposal. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period
(i)as the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii)as to which CBOE 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-CBOE-2007-120 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2007-120. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2007-120 and should be submitted on or before March 21, 2008. 9 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 9 Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-3798 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-57360; File No. SR-ISE-2008-06] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Create a Delta Hedging Exemption from Equity Options Position Limits February 20, 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 February 1, 2008, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (“ISE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by ISE. The Exchange has filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to create a delta hedging exemption from equity options position limits pursuant to ISE Rule 413 (Exemptions from Position Limits). The text of the proposed rule change is available at ISE, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.ise.com.* II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, ISE included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. ISE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose All options traded on the Exchange are subject to position and exercise limits, as provided under ISE Rules 412 and 413. 5 Position limits are imposed, generally, to maintain fair and orderly markets for options and other securities by limiting the amount of control one or more affiliated persons or entities may have over one particular options class or the security or securities that underlie that options class. Exchange rules also contain various hedge exemptions to allow certain hedged positions in excess of the applicable standard position limit. 6 5 Position limits for index options are provided separately under Rules 2004, 2005, and 2006. 6 *See* Rule 413. Over the years, ISE has increased the size of options position and exercise limits, as well as the size and scope of available hedge exemptions to the applicable position limits. 7 These hedge exemptions generally require a one-to-one hedge ( *i.e.* , one stock option contract must be hedged by the number of shares underlying the options contract, typically 100 shares). In practice, however, many firms do not hedge their options positions in this manner. Instead, these firms engage in what is commonly known as “delta hedging.” Delta hedging varies the number of shares of the underlying security used to hedge an options position based upon the relative sensitivity of the value of the option contract to a change in the price of the underlying security. 8 Delta hedging is a widely accepted method for risk management. 7 *See, e.g.* , Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 56493 (September 21, 2007), 72 FR 55266 (September 28, 2007); 56263 (August 15, 2007), 72 FR 47105 (August 22, 2007); and 56020 (July 6, 2007), 72 FR 38109 (July 12, 2007). 8 To illustrate, a stock option contract with a delta of .5 will move $0.50 for every $1.00 move in the underlying stock. *Delta Neutral-Based Equity Hedge Exemption.* The Exchange proposes to adopt a new exemption from equity options position and exercise limits 9 for positions held by ISE members and certain of their affiliates that are “delta neutral” 10 under a “permitted pricing model” (as defined below), subject to certain conditions (“Exemption”). The proposed Exemption would apply only to equity options (stock options and options on exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”)). 11 9 Rule 414 establishes exercise limits for an option at the same level as the option's position limit under Rule 412; therefore, no changes are proposed to Rule 414. 10 The term “delta neutral” is defined in proposed Rule 413(a)(7)(A) as referring to an equity option position that is hedged, in accordance with a permitted pricing model, by a position in the underlying security or one or more instruments relating to the underlying security, for the purpose of offsetting the risk that the value of the option position will change with incremental changes in the price of the security underlying the option position. 11 The Exchange intends to submit a separate proposed rule change to adopt a delta neutral based hedge exemption for certain index options and to expand the delta neutral-based hedge exemption for ETF options to allow highly correlated instruments to be included in any ETF option net delta calculation. Any equity option position that is not delta neutral would be subject to position and exercise limits, subject to the availability of other exemptions. Only the “option contract equivalent of the net delta” of such position would be subject to the appropriate position limit. 12 12 Under proposed Rule 413(a)(7)(B), the term “options contract equivalent of the net delta” is defined as the net delta divided by the number of shares underlying the option contract, and the term “net delta” is defined as, at any time, the number of shares (either long or short) required to offset the risk that the value of an equity option position will change with incremental changes in the price of the security underlying the option position, as determined in accordance with a permitted pricing model. Only financial instruments relating to the security underlying an equity options position could be included in any determination of an equity options position's net delta or whether the options position is delta neutral. In addition, members could not use the same equity or other financial instrument position in connection with more than one hedge exemption. Therefore, a stock position used as part of a delta hedging strategy could not also serve as the basis for any other equity hedge exemption. *Permitted Pricing Model.* Under the proposed rule, the calculation of the delta for any equity option position, and the determination of whether a particular equity option position is delta neutral, must be made using a permitted pricing model. A “permitted pricing model” is defined in proposed Rule 413(a)(7)(C) to mean the pricing model maintained and operated by The Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) and the pricing models used by
(i)a member or its affiliate subject to consolidated supervision by the Commission pursuant to Appendix E of Rule 15c3-1;
(ii)a financial holding company (“FHC”) or a company treated as an FHC under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, or its affiliate subject to consolidated holding company group supervision; 13
(iii)an SEC registered OTC derivatives dealer; 14 and
(iv)a national bank. 15 13 The pricing model of an FHC or of an affiliate of an FHC would have to be consistent with:
(i)The requirements of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“FRB”), as amended from time to time, in connection with the calculation of risk-based adjustments to capital for market risk under capital requirements of the FRB, provided that the member or affiliate of a member relying on this exemption in connection with the use of such model is an entity that is part of such company's consolidated supervised holding company group; or
(ii)the standards published by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, as amended from time to time and as implemented by such company's principal regulator, in connection with the calculation of risk-based deductions or adjustments to or allowances for the market risk capital requirements of such principal regulator applicable to such company—where “principal regulator” means a member of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision that is the home country consolidated supervisor of such company—provided that the member or affiliate of a member relying on this exemption in connection with the use of such model is an entity that is part of such company's consolidated supervised holding company group. *See* proposed Rule 413(a)(7)(C)(3). 14 The pricing model of a Commission-registered OTC derivatives dealer would have to be consistent with the requirements of Appendix F to Rules 15c3-1 and 15c3-4 under the Act, as amended from time to time, in connection with the calculation of risk-based deductions from capital for market risk thereunder. Only an OTC derivatives dealer and no other affiliated entity (including a member) would be able to rely on this part of the Exemption. *See* proposed Rule 413(a)(7)(C)(4). 15 The pricing model of a national bank would have to be consistent with the requirements of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, as amended from time to time, in connection with the calculation of risk-based adjustments to capital for market risk under capital requirements of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Only a national bank and no other affiliated entity (including a member) would be able to rely on this part of the Exemption. *See* proposed Rule 413(a)(7)(C)(5). *Aggregation of Accounts.* Members and non-member affiliates relying on the Exemption would be required to ensure that the permitted pricing model is applied to all positions in or relating to the security underlying the relevant options position that are owned or controlled by the member, or its affiliates. However, the net delta of an options position held by an entity entitled to rely on the Exemption, or by a separate and distinct trading unit of such entity, may be calculated without regard to positions in or relating to the security underlying the option position held by an affiliated entity or by another trading unit within the same entity, provided that:
(i)The entity demonstrates to the Exchange's satisfaction that no control relationship, as defined in Rule 412(f), exists between such affiliates or trading units, and
(ii)the entity has provided the Exchange written notice in advance that it intends to be considered separate and distinct from any affiliate, or, as applicable, which trading units within the entity are to be considered separate and distinct from each other for purposes of the Exemption. 16 16 *See* proposed Rule 413(a)(7)(D)(2). Any member or non-member affiliate relying on the Exemption must designate, by prior written notice to the Exchange, each trading unit or entity whose options positions are required by Exchange rules to be aggregated with the options positions of such member or non-member affiliate relying on the Exemption for purposes of compliance with Exchange position or exercise limits. 17 17 *See* proposed Rule 413(a)(7)(D)(3). *Obligations of Members and Affiliates.* Any member relying on the Exemption would be required to provide a written certification to the Exchange that it is using a permitted pricing model as defined in the rule for purposes of the Exemption. In addition, by such reliance, such member would authorize any other person carrying for such member an account including, or with whom such member has entered into, a position in or relating to a security underlying the relevant option position to provide to the Exchange or OCC such information regarding such account or position as the Exchange or OCC may request as part of the Exchange's confirmation or verification of the accuracy of any net delta calculation under this Exemption. 18 18 *See* proposed Rule 413(a)(7)(E). The options positions of a non-member affiliate relying on the Exemption must be carried by a member with which it is affiliated. A member carrying an account that includes an equity option position for a non-member affiliate that intends to rely on the Exemption would be required to obtain from such non-member affiliate a written certification that it is using a permitted pricing model as defined in the rule for purposes of the Exemption. 19 19 In addition, the member would be required to obtain from such non-member affiliate a written statement confirming that such non-member affiliate:
(a)Is relying on the Exemption;
(b)will use only a permitted pricing model for purposes of calculating the net delta of its option positions for purposes of the Exemption;
(c)will promptly notify the member if it ceases to rely on the Exemption;
(d)authorizes the member to provide to the Exchange or the OCC such information regarding positions of the non-member affiliate as the Exchange or OCC may request as part of the Exchange's confirmation or verification of the accuracy of any net delta calculation under the Exemption; and
(e)if the non-member affiliate is using the OCC Model, has duly executed and delivered to the Exchange such documents as the Exchange may require to be executed and delivered to the Exchange as a condition to reliance on the Exemption. *See* subparagraph (E)(3) of proposed Rule 413(a)(7). *Reporting.* Under proposed Rule 413(a)(7)(F), each member relying on the Exemption would be required to report, in accordance with Rule 415 20
(i)all equity option positions (including those that are delta neutral) that are reportable thereunder, and
(ii)on its own behalf or on behalf of a designated aggregation unit pursuant to Rule 413(a)(7)(F), for each such account that holds an equity option position subject to the Exemption in excess of the levels specified in Rule 413, the net delta and the options contract equivalent of the net delta of such position. 20 Rule 415 requires, among other things, that members report to the Exchange aggregate long or short positions on the same side of the market of 200 or more contracts of any single class of options contracts dealt in on the Exchange. The Exchange and other self-regulatory organizations are working on modifying the Large Options Position Report system and/or OCC reports to allow a member to indicate that an equity options position is delta neutral. *Records.* Under proposed Rule 413(a)(7)(G), each member relying on the Exemption would be required to
(i)retain, and would be required to undertake reasonable efforts to ensure that any non-member affiliate of the member relying on the exemption retains, a list of the options, securities and other instruments underlying each options position net delta calculation reported to the Exchange hereunder, and
(ii)produce such information to the Exchange upon request. 21 21 A member would be authorized to report position information of its non-member affiliate pursuant to the written statement required under proposed Rule 413(a)(7)(E)(3)(ii)(d). *Reliance on Federal Oversight.* As provided under proposed Rule 413, a permitted pricing model includes proprietary pricing models used by members and affiliates that have been approved by the Commission, the FRB or another federal financial regulator. In adopting the proposed Exemption, the Exchange would be relying upon the rigorous approval processes and ongoing oversight of a federal financial regulator. The Exchange notes that it would not be under any obligation to verify whether a member's or its affiliate's use of a proprietary pricing model is appropriate or yielding accurate results. The Exchange will issue a regulatory circular stating the operative date and describing the substantive terms of the proposed rule change no later than 60 days after the Commission issues notice of the proposed rule change. The operative date shall be such date as may be necessary to ensure that necessary technology changes to The Options Clearing Corporation and the Securities Industry Automation Corporation reports used for position limit surveillance have been completed. 22 22 Telephone conversation between John Rademacher, Assistant General Counsel, ISE, and Ira Brandriss, Special Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets, Commission, on February 19, 2008. 2. *Statutory Basis* The Exchange believes the rule proposal is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. 23 Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) 24 Act requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes the proposed delta neutral-based hedge exemption from equity options position and exercise limits is appropriate in that it is based on a widely accepted risk management method used in options trading. Also, the Commission has previously stated its support for recognizing options positions hedged on a delta neutral basis as properly exempted from position limits. 25 23 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 24 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 25 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40594 (October 23, 1998), 63 FR 59362, 59380 (November 3, 1998) (adopting rules relating to OTC Derivatives Dealers). B. *Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition* The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. *Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others* The Exchange has not solicited, and does no intend to solicit, comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested parties. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change does not:
(1)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)become operative for 30 days after the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 26 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 27 26 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 27 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. 28 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 29 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because such waiver would allow the Exchange to implement the delta hedging exemption from equity options position limits without needless delay. The Commission notes that it recently approved a substantially similar proposal filed by the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated. 30 The Commission believes that ISE's proposal to create a delta hedging exemption from equity options position limits raises no new issues. For these reasons, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing with the Commission. 31 28 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied the five-day pre-filing notice requirement. 29 *Id.* 30 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56970 (December 14, 2007), 72 FR 72428 (December 20, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-99). 31 For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-ISE-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-ISE-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 the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of ISE. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2008-06 and should be submitted on or before March 21, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 32 32 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-3842 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-57358; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2008-17] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Create a Delta Hedging Exemption From Equity Options Position Limits February 20, 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 February 6, 2008, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by NYSE Arca. The Exchange has filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change NYSE Arca proposes to amend Exchange Rule 6.8 in order to create a delta hedging exemption from equity options position limits. The text of the proposed rule change is available at NYSE Arca, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.nysearca.com.* II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, NYSE Arca included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. NYSE Arca has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose All options traded on the Exchange are subject to position and exercise limits, as provided under NYSE Arca Rule 6.8. 5 Position limits are imposed, generally, to maintain fair and orderly markets for options and other securities by limiting the amount of control by one or more affiliated persons or entities over one particular options class or the security or securities that underlie that options class. Exchange rules also contain various hedge exemptions to allow certain hedged positions in excess of the applicable standard position limit. 6 5 Position limits for index options are provided separately under NYSE Arca Rule 5.15 through Rule 5.17. 6 *See* NYSE Arca Rule 6.8 Commentary .07-.08. Over the years, NYSE Arca has, at times, increased the size of options position and exercise limits, as well as the size and scope of available hedge exemptions to the applicable position limits. 7 These hedge exemptions generally require a one-to-one hedge ( *i.e.* , one stock option contract must be hedged by the number of shares underlying the options contract, typically 100 shares). In practice, however, many firms do not hedge their options positions in this manner. Instead, these firms engage in what is commonly known as “delta hedging.” Delta hedging varies the number of shares of the underlying security used to hedge an options position based upon the relative sensitivity of the value of the option contract to a change in the price of the underlying security. 8 The Exchange believes that delta hedging is a widely accepted method for risk management. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 55347 (February 26, 2007), 72 FR 9823 (March 5, 2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-19); 54385 (August 30, 2006), 71 FR 53150 (September 8, 2006) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-49); 51286 (March 1, 2005) 70 FR 11297 (SR-PCX-2003-55); and 45737 (April 11, 2005), 67 FR 18975 (SR-PCX-2000-45). 8 To illustrate, a stock option contract with a delta of .5 will move $0.50 for every $1.00 move in the underlying stock. *Delta Neutral-Based Equity Hedge Exemption.* The Exchange proposes to adopt a new exemption from equity options position and exercise limits 9 for positions held by NYSE Arca OTP Holders and OTP Firms, 10 and certain of their affiliates, that are “delta neutral” 11 under a “permitted pricing model” (as defined below), subject to certain conditions (“Exemption”). The proposed Exemption would apply only to equity options (stock options and options on exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”)). 12 9 NYSE Arca Rule 6.9 establishes exercise limits for an option at the same level as the option's position limit under NYSE Arca Rule 6.8; therefore, no changes are proposed to Rule 6.9. 10 OTP Holders (NYSE Arca Rule 1.1(q)) and OTP Firms (NYSE Arca Rule 1.1(r)) have the status of a “member” of the Exchange as defined in Section 3 of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78c. 11 The term “delta neutral” is defined in proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09(a) as referring to an equity option position that is hedged, in accordance with a permitted pricing model, by a position in the underlying security or one or more instruments relating to the underlying security, for the purpose of offsetting the risk that the value of the option position will change with incremental changes in the price of the security underlying the option position. 12 The Exchange intends to submit a separate proposed rule change to adopt a delta neutral-based hedge exemption for certain index options and to expand the delta neutral-based hedge exemption for ETF options to allow highly correlated instruments to be included in any ETF option net delta calculation. Any equity option position that is not delta neutral would be subject to position and exercise limits, subject to the availability of other exemptions. Only the “option contract equivalent of the net delta” of such position would be subject to the appropriate position limit. 13 13 Under proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09(b) the term “options contract equivalent of the net delta” is defined as the net delta divided by the number of shares underlying the option contract, and the term “net delta” is defined as, at any time, the number of shares (either long or short) required to offset the risk that the value of an equity option position will change with incremental changes in the price of the security underlying the option position, as determined in accordance with a permitted pricing model. Only financial instruments relating to the security underlying an equity options position could be included in any determination of an equity options position's net delta or whether the options position is delta neutral. In addition, members could not use the same equity or other financial instrument position in connection with more than one hedge exemption. Therefore, a stock position used as part of a delta hedging strategy could not also serve as the basis for any other equity hedge exemption. *Permitted Pricing Model.* Under the proposed rule, the calculation of the delta for any equity option position, and the determination of whether a particular equity option position is delta neutral, must be made using a permitted pricing model. A “permitted pricing model” is defined in proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09(c) to mean the pricing model maintained and operated by The Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) and the pricing models used by:
(i)An OTP Holder or OTP Firm or its affiliate subject to consolidated supervision by the Commission pursuant to Appendix E of Rule 15c3-1 under the Act;
(ii)a financial holding company (“FHC”) or a company treated as an FHC under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, or its affiliate subject to consolidated holding company group supervision; 14
(iii)a Commission-registered OTC derivatives dealer; 15 and
(iv)a national bank. 16 14 The pricing model of an FHC or of an affiliate of an FHC would have to be consistent with:
(i)The requirements of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“FRB”), as amended from time to time, in connection with the calculation of risk-based adjustments to capital for market risk under capital requirements of the FRB, provided that the OTP Holder or OTP Firm (or affiliate thereof) relying on this exemption in connection with the use of such model is an entity that is part of such company's consolidated supervised holding company group; or
(ii)the standards published by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, as amended from time to time and as implemented by such company's principal regulator, in connection with the calculation of risk-based deductions or adjustments to or allowances for the market risk capital requirements of such principal regulator applicable to such company—where “principal regulator” means a member of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision that is the home country consolidated supervisor of such company—provided that the OTP Holder or OTP Firm (or affiliate thereof) relying on this exemption in connection with the use of such model is an entity that is part of such company's consolidated supervised holding company group. *See* subsection (c)(3) of proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09. 15 The pricing model of a Commission-registered OTC derivatives dealer would have to be consistent with the requirements of Appendix F to Rules 15c3-1 and 15c3-4 under the Act, as amended from time to time, in connection with the calculation of risk-based deductions from capital for market risk thereunder. Only an OTC derivatives dealer and no other affiliated entity (including an OTP Holder or OTP Firm) would be able to rely on this part of the Exemption. *See* subsection (c)(4) of proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09. 16 The pricing model of a national bank would have to be consistent with the requirements of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, as amended from time to time, in connection with the calculation of risk-based adjustments to capital for market risk under capital requirements of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Only a national bank and no other affiliated entity (including an OTP Holder or OTP Firm) would be able to rely on this part of the Exemption. *See* subparagraph (c)(5) of proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09. *Aggregation of Accounts.* An OTP Holder or OTP Firm (or an affiliate thereof) relying on the Exemption would be required to ensure that the permitted pricing model is applied to all positions in or relating to the security underlying the relevant options position that are owned or controlled by the OTP Holder or OTP Firm, or its affiliate. However, the net delta of an options position held by an entity entitled to rely on the Exemption, or by a separate and distinct trading unit of such entity, may be calculated without regard to positions in or relating to the security underlying the option position held by an affiliated entity or by another trading unit within the same entity, provided that:
(i)The entity demonstrates to the Exchange's satisfaction that no control relationship 17 exists between such affiliates or trading units; and
(ii)the entity has provided the Exchange written notice in advance that it intends to be considered separate and distinct from any affiliate, or, as applicable, which trading units within the entity are to be considered separate and distinct from each other for purposes of the Exemption. 18 17 For purposes of the proposed rule, “control” is as defined in *Position and Exercise Limits* , NYSE Arca Regulatory Bulletin RBO-07-08 (August 31, 2007). 18 *See* subsection
(d)of proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09. The Exchange has previously set forth in a regulatory bulletin the conditions under which it will deem control exists between affiliated broker dealers and between separate and distinct trading units within the same broker-dealer. 19 The Exchange will also issue a subsequent regulatory bulletin, explaining the aggregation of accounts, for the purpose of position limits, for broker-dealers and their non-broker dealer affiliates. The Exchange will issue this bulletin prior to the operative date of this rule change. 19 *See supra* note 17. Any OTP Holder or OTP Firm (or affiliate thereof) relying on the Exemption must designate, by prior written notice to the Exchange, each trading unit or entity whose options positions are required by Exchange rules to be aggregated with the options positions of such OTP Holder or OTP Firm (or affiliate thereof) relying on the Exemption for purposes of compliance with Exchange position or exercise limits. 20 20 *See* subparagraph (d)(3) of proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09. *Obligations of OTP Holders and OTP Firms (and affiliates thereof).* Any OTP Holder or OTP Firm relying on the Exemption would be required to provide a written certification to the Exchange that it is using a permitted pricing model as defined in the rule for purposes of the Exemption. In addition, by such reliance, such OTP Holder or OTP Firm would authorize any other person carrying for such OTP Holder or OTP Firm an account including, or with whom such OTP Holder or OTP Firm has entered into, a position in or relating to a security underlying the relevant option position to provide to the Exchange or OCC such information regarding such account or position as the Exchange or OCC may request as part of the Exchange's confirmation or verification of the accuracy of any net delta calculation under this Exemption. 21 21 *See* subsection
(e)of proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09. The options positions of a non-OTP Holder or Firm affiliate, relying on the Exemption must be carried by an OTP Holder or OTP Firm with which it is affiliated. An OTP Holder or OTP Firm carrying an account that includes an equity option position for an affiliate that intends to rely on the Exemption would be required to obtain from such affiliate a written certification that it is using a permitted pricing model as defined in the rule for purposes of the Exemption. 22 22 In addition, the OTP Holder or OTP Firm would be required to obtain from such affiliate a written statement confirming that such affiliate:
(a)Is relying on the Exemption;
(b)will use only a permitted pricing model for purposes of calculating the net delta of its option positions for purposes of the Exemption;
(c)will promptly notify the affiliated OTP Holder or OTP Firm if it ceases to rely on the Exemption;
(d)authorizes the OTP Holder or OTP Firm to provide to the Exchange or the OCC such information regarding positions of the affiliate as the Exchange or OCC may request as part of the Exchange's confirmation or verification of the accuracy of any net delta calculation under the Exemption; and
(e)if the affiliate is using the OCC Model, has duly executed and delivered to the Exchange such documents as the Exchange may require to be executed and delivered to the Exchange as a condition to reliance on the Exemption. *See* subparagraph (e)(3) of proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09. *Reporting.* Under proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09(f) each OTP Holder or OTP Firm relying on the Exemption would be required to report, in accordance with Rule 6.6, 23
(i)all equity option positions (including those that are delta neutral) that are reportable thereunder, and
(ii)on its own behalf or on behalf of a designated aggregation unit pursuant to proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09(d), for each such account that holds an equity option position subject to the Exemption in excess of the levels specified in Rule 6.8(a) Commentary .05-06, the net delta and the options contract equivalent of the net delta of such position. 23 NYSE Arca Rule 6.6 requires, among other things, that OTP Holders and OTP Firms report to the Exchange aggregate long or short positions on the same side of the market of 200 or more contracts of any single class of options contracts dealt in on the Exchange. The Exchange and other self-regulatory organizations are working on modifying the Large Options Position Report system and/or OCC reports to allow a member organization to indicate that an equity options position is delta neutral. *Records.* Under proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09(g) each OTP Holder or OTP Firm relying on the Exemption would be required to
(i)retain, and would be required to undertake reasonable efforts to ensure that any affiliate of the OTP Holder or OTP Firm relying on the exemption retains, a list of the options, securities and other instruments underlying each options position net delta calculation reported to the Exchange hereunder, and
(ii)produce such information to the Exchange upon request. 24 24 An OTP Holder or OTP Firm would be authorized to report position information of its affiliate pursuant to the written statement required under proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09(e)(3)(ii)(d). *Reliance on Federal Oversight.* As provided under proposed Rule 6.8 Commentary .09(c) a permitted pricing model includes proprietary pricing models used by OTP Holders and OTP Firms (and affiliates thereof) that have been approved by the Commission, the FRB, or another federal financial regulator. In adopting the proposed Exemption, the Exchange would be relying upon the rigorous approval processes and ongoing oversight of a federal financial regulator. The Exchange notes that it would not be under any obligation to verify whether an OTP Holder or OTP Firm or its affiliate's use of a proprietary pricing model is appropriate or yielding accurate results. This rule change will become effective upon filing, although it will not become operative until such time that the Exchange, the OCC, and the Securities Industry Automation Corporation (“SIAC”) have completed required technology changes to automated reports used for position limit surveillance. The operative date for the rule change will be announced by NYSE Arca via an options regulatory bulletin, within 30 days following the effective date of the filing. OTP Firms and OTP Holders will not be able to take advantage of the delta neutral-based equity hedge exemption contained in this proposal until the announced operative date. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 25 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 26 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, 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. The Exchange believes the proposed delta neutral-based hedge exemption from equity options position and exercise limits is appropriate in that it is based on a widely accepted risk management method used in options trading. Also, the Commission has previously stated its support for recognizing options positions hedged on a delta neutral basis as properly exempted from position limits. 27 25 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 26 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 27 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40594 (October 23, 1998), 63 FR 59362, 59380 (November 3, 1998) (S7-30-97) (adopting rules relating to OTC Derivatives Dealers). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change does not:
(1)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)become operative for 30 days after the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 28 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 29 28 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 29 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. 30 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 31 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because such waiver would allow the Exchange to implement the delta hedging exemption from equity options position limits without needless delay. The Commission notes that it recently approved a substantially similar proposal filed by the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated. 32 The Commission believes that NYSE Arca's proposal to create a delta hedging exemption from equity options position limits raises no new issues. For these reasons, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing with the Commission. 33 30 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied the five-day pre-filing notice requirement. 31 *Id.* 32 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56970 (December 14, 2007), 72 FR 72428 (December 20, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-99). 33 For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NYSEArca-2008-17 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2008-17. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of 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-2008-17 and should be submitted on or before March 21, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 34 34 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-3844 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-57377; File No. SR-NYSE Arca-2008-19] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 7.31 To Modify the Primary Only Order Type February 25, 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 February 13, 2008, 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 7.31(x) in order to modify the permissible order entry time and eligibility of its Primary Only Order (“PO Order”). The text of the proposed rule change is available at NYSE Arca, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.nyse.com.* II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, 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 The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Arca Equities rule 7.31(x) to modify the operability and eligibility of PO Orders in order to provide additional flexibility and increased functionality to its system and its Users. 5 5 *See* NYSE Arca Rule 1.1(yy) for the definition of “User.” The PO Order is a market or limit order that is routed to the primary, listing market, without sweeping the NYSE Arca book. 6 PO Orders may be entered until a cut-off time as determined from time to time by the Corporation. Presently, the Exchange restricts PO Orders to participation in the primary, listing market opening. In an effort to enhance order execution opportunities for its Users, the Exchange proposes to modify the PO Order type so that they may be entered at any time and to offer an order modifier for Users to designate PO Orders that are eligible for entry and execution throughout the trading day. 6 NYSE Arca Rule 7.31(x). According to the proposal, a PO Order may be entered at any time 7 ; and will be immediately routed to the primary, listing market for execution. If the order is not IOC, the order is not returned to the NYSE Arca book; rather it remains at the venue routed to, until executed or cancelled that day. In instances where a symbol is halted, the PO Order will remain at the primary, listing market until such time that it is cancelled or the symbol is re-opened. PO Orders eligible for participation in the primary, listing market's opening must be entered before 6:28 a.m. (Pacific Time). A PO Order entered for participation in the primary, listing market re-opening after a trading halt must be entered after trading was halted on the Corporation and before the Re-Opening Time. Otherwise, PO Orders eligible for participation in the primary, listing market at all other times must be marked with the modifier: PO+. 7 Users would be able to enter PO Orders into the system for execution during any of the Exchange's trading sessions (Opening, Core and Late Sessions). The proposed changes to the PO Order type will provide additional flexibility and functionality to the Exchange's system and its Users that wish to use the system to comply with their obligations to avoid trading through any Protected Quotation within the meaning of Rule 600(b)(58) of Regulation NMS. 8 PO Orders may be designated as intermarket sweep orders thereby providing the entering party the ability to trade-through any protected bid or offer (as defined in Rule 600(b) of Regulation NMS under the Act) and to execute at the primary, listing market. Of course, a broker-dealer that designates an order as an intermarket sweep order has the responsibility of complying with Rules 610 and 611 of Regulation NMS. 8 17 CFR 242.600(b)(58). The Exchange believes that the proposed clarification and additional modifier will enhance flexibility and order execution opportunities for its Users. The Exchange also believes that the proposed amendments will also allow its Users to comply with their obligation to avoid trading through any protected bid or offer within the meaning of Rule 600(b) of Regulation NMS. In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed functionality is substantially similar to the “Directed Orders” presently offered by The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”). 9 9 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55405 (March 6, 2007), 72 FR 11069 (March 12, 2007) (SR-NASDAQ-2007-020). 2. Statutory Basis The proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of section 6 of the Act, 10 in general, and with sections 6(b)(1) and (b)(5) of the Act, 11 in particular, in that the proposal is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system. 10 15 U.S.C. 78f. 11 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 12 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 13 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 13 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 14 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 15 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. 16 The Commission hereby grants the Exchange's request and designates the proposal as operative upon filing. 14 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. 15 *Id.* 16 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-2008-19 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-2008-19. 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-2008-19 and should be submitted on or before March 21, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 17 17 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-3890 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-57359; File No. SR-Phlx-2008-07] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Create a Delta Hedging Exemption From Equity Options Position Limits February 20, 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 February 12, 2008, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by Phlx. The Exchange has filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend Phlx Rule 1001 to establish a delta hedge exemption from equity options position limits. 5 The text of the proposed rule change is available at Phlx, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.phlx.com.* 5 The proposed filing is being done pursuant to an industry-wide initiative, under the auspices of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (“ISG”), to establish comparable delta hedge exemption rules among exchanges. ISG is a regulatory information-sharing organization comprised of all U.S. national securities exchanges and national securities associations, most U.S. futures exchanges, and non-U.S. exchanges and associations trading securities and related products. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, Phlx included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. Phlx has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of the proposed rule change is to permit expanded hedge positions pursuant to a carefully crafted delta hedge exemption from equity options position limits in Phlx Rule 1001. *Background.* All options traded on the Exchange are subject to position and exercise limits, as provided under Phlx Rules 1001 and 1002, respectively. 6 Position limits are imposed, generally, to maintain fair and orderly markets for options and other securities by limiting the amount of control one or more affiliated persons or entities may have over one particular options class or the security or securities that underlie that options class. 6 Position and exercise limits for index options are provided separately under Phlx Rules 1001A and 1002A. Over the years, Phlx has increased the size of options position and exercise limits, as well as the size and scope of available hedge exemptions to the applicable position limits. 7 These hedge exemptions generally require a one-to-one hedge ( *e.g.* , one stock option contract must be hedged by the number of shares underlying the options contract, typically 100 shares). In practice, however, many firms do not hedge their options positions in this manner. Instead, these firms engage in what is commonly known as “delta hedging.” Delta hedging varies the number of shares of the underlying security used to hedge an options position based upon the relative sensitivity of the value of the option contract to a change in the price of the underlying security. 8 The Exchange believes that delta hedging is a widely accepted method for risk management. 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51071 (January 21, 2005), 70 FR 4911 (January 31, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-05); 55285 (February 13, 2007), 72 FR 8053 (February 22, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2007-10); 45899 (May 9, 2002), 67 FR 34980 (May 16, 2002) (SR-Phlx-2002-33); 42386 (February 4, 2000), 65 FR 6680 (February 10, 2000) (SR-Phlx-98-55); and 40400 (September 3, 1998), 63 FR 48777 (September 11, 1998) (SR-Phlx-98-36). 8 To illustrate, a stock option contract with a delta of .5 will move $0.50 for every $1.00 move in the underlying stock. *Delta Neutral-Based Equity Hedge Exemption.* The Exchange proposes to adopt a new exemption from equity options position and exercise limits 9 for positions held by Phlx members and certain of their affiliates that are “delta neutral” 10 under a “permitted pricing model” (as defined below), subject to certain conditions (“Exemption”). The proposed Exemption would apply only to equity options (stock options and options on exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”)). 11 9 Phlx Rule 1002 establishes exercise limits for an option at the same level as the option's position limit under Phlx Rule 1001; therefore, no changes are proposed to Rule 1002. 10 The term “delta neutral” is defined in proposed Commentary .09(a) to Phlx Rule 1001 as referring to an equity option position that is hedged, in accordance with a permitted pricing model, by a position in the underlying security or one or more instruments relating to the underlying security, for the purpose of offsetting the risk that the value of the option position will change with incremental changes in the price of the security underlying the option position. 11 The Exchange intends to submit a separate proposed rule change, in conjunction with an industry initiative, to adopt a delta neutral-based hedge exemption for certain index options and to expand the delta neutral-based hedge exemption for ETF options to allow highly correlated instruments to be included in any ETF option net delta calculation. Any equity option position that is not delta neutral would be subject to position and exercise limits, subject to the availability of other exemptions. Only the “option contract equivalent of the net delta” of such position would be subject to the appropriate position limit. 12 12 Under proposed Commentary .09(b) to Phlx Rule 1001, the term “options contract equivalent of the net delta” is defined as the net delta divided by the number of shares underlying the option contract, and the term “net delta” is defined as, at any time, the number of shares (either long or short) required to offset the risk that the value of an equity option position will change with incremental changes in the price of the security underlying the option position, as determined in accordance with a permitted pricing model. Only financial instruments relating to the security underlying an equity options position could be included in any determination of an equity options position's net delta or whether the options position is delta neutral. In addition, members could not use the same equity or other financial instrument position in connection with more than one hedge exemption. Therefore, a stock position used as part of a delta hedging strategy could not also serve as the basis for any other equity hedge exemption. *Permitted Pricing Model.* Under the proposed rule, the calculation of the delta for any equity option position, and the determination of whether a particular equity option position is delta neutral, must be made using a permitted pricing model. A “permitted pricing model” is defined in proposed Commentary .09(c) to mean the pricing model maintained and operated by The Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) and the pricing models used by:
(i)A member or its affiliate subject to consolidated supervision by the Commission pursuant to Appendix E of Rule 15c3-1 under the Act;
(ii)a financial holding company (“FHC”) or a company treated as an FHC under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, or its affiliate subject to consolidated holding company group supervision; 13
(iii)a Commission-registered OTC derivatives dealer; 14 and
(iv)a national bank. 15 13 The pricing model of an FHC or of an affiliate of an FHC would have to be consistent with:
(i)The requirements of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Fed”), as amended from time to time, in connection with the calculation of risk-based adjustments to capital for market risk under capital requirements of the Fed, provided that the member or affiliate of a member relying on this exemption in connection with the use of such model is an entity that is part of such company's consolidated supervised holding company group; or
(ii)the standards published by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, as amended from time to time and as implemented by such company's principal regulator, in connection with the calculation of risk-based deductions or adjustments to or allowances for the market risk capital requirements of such principal regulator applicable to such company—where “principal regulator” means a member of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision that is the home country consolidated supervisor of such company—provided that the member or affiliate of a member relying on this exemption in connection with the use of such model is an entity that is part of such company's consolidated supervised holding company group. *See* proposed Commentary .09(c)(3) to Phlx Rule 1001. 14 The pricing model of a Commission-registered OTC derivatives dealer would have to be consistent with the requirements of Appendix F to Rule 15c3-1 and Rule 15c3-4 under the Act, as amended from time to time, in connection with the calculation of risk-based deductions from capital for market risk thereunder. Only an OTC derivatives dealer and no other affiliated entity (including a member) would be able to rely on this part of the Exemption. *See* proposed Commentary. 09(c)(4) to Phlx Rule 1001. 15 The pricing model of a national bank would have to be consistent with the requirements of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, as amended from time to time, in connection with the calculation of risk-based adjustments to capital for market risk under capital requirements of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Only a national bank and no other affiliated entity (including a member) would be able to rely on this part of the Exemption. *See* proposed Commentary .09(c)(5) to Phlx Rule 1001. *Aggregation of Accounts.* Members and non-member affiliates relying on the Exemption would be required to ensure that the permitted pricing model is applied to all positions in or relating to the security underlying the relevant options position that are owned or controlled by the member, or its affiliates. However, the net delta of an options position held by an entity entitled to rely on the Exemption, or by a separate and distinct trading unit of such entity, may be calculated without regard to positions in or relating to the security underlying the option position held by an affiliated entity or by another trading unit within the same entity, provided that:
(i)The entity demonstrates to the Exchange's satisfaction that no control relationship, as defined in Commentary .06 to Phlx Rule 1001, exists between such affiliates or trading units, and
(ii)the entity has provided the Exchange written notice in advance that it intends to be considered separate and distinct from any affiliate, or, as applicable, which trading units within the entity are to be considered separate and distinct from each other for purposes of the Exemption. 16 16 *See* proposed Commentary .09(d) to Phlx Rule 1001. The Exchange has set forth, in Phlx Memorandum No. 0025-08 (“Aggregation Memo”), the conditions under which it will deem no control relationship to exist between affiliated broker-dealers, and between separate and distinct trading units within the same broker-dealer. Subsequent to this proposal the Exchange intends to update the Aggregation Memo to clarify the inclusion of affiliated entities, not only affiliated broker-dealers as in the current version of the Aggregation Memo. Any member or non-member affiliate relying on the Exemption must designate, by prior written notice to the Exchange, each trading unit or entity whose options positions are required by Exchange rules to be aggregated with the options positions of such member or non-member affiliate relying on the Exemption for purposes of compliance with Exchange position or exercise limits. 17 17 *See* proposed Commentary .09(d)(3) to Phlx Rule 1001. *Obligations of Members and Affiliates.* Any member relying on the Exemption would be required to provide a written certification to the Exchange that it is using a permitted pricing model as defined in the rule for purposes of the Exemption. In addition, by such reliance, such member would authorize any other person carrying for such member an account including, or with whom such member has entered into, a position in or relating to a security underlying the relevant option position to provide to the Exchange or OCC such information regarding such account or position as the Exchange or OCC may request as part of the Exchange's confirmation or verification of the accuracy of any net delta calculation under this exemption. 18 18 *See* proposed Commentary .09(e) to Phlx Rule 1001. The options positions of a non-member affiliate relying on the Exemption must be carried by a member with whom it is affiliated. A member carrying an account that includes an equity option position for a non-member affiliate that intends to rely on the Exemption would be required to obtain from such non-member affiliate a written certification that it is using a permitted pricing model as defined in the rule for purposes of the Exemption. 19 19 In addition, the member would be required to obtain from such non-member affiliate a written statement confirming that such non-member affiliate:
(a)Is relying on the Exemption;
(b)will use only a permitted pricing model for purposes of calculating the net delta of its option positions for purposes of the Exemption;
(c)will promptly notify the member if it ceases to rely on the Exemption;
(d)authorizes the member to provide to the Exchange or the OCC such information regarding positions of the non-member affiliate as the Exchange or OCC may request as part of the Exchange's confirmation or verification of the accuracy of any net delta calculation under the Exemption; and
(e)if the non-member affiliate is using the OCC Model, has duly executed and delivered to the Exchange such documents as the Exchange may require to be executed and delivered to the Exchange as a condition to reliance on the Exemption. See proposed Commentary .09(e)(3)(ii) to Phlx Rule 1001. *Reporting.* Under proposed Commentary .09(f) to Phlx Rule 1001, each member relying on the Exemption would be required to report, in accordance with Phlx Rule 1003, 20
(i)all equity option positions (including those that are delta neutral) that are reportable thereunder, and
(ii)on its own behalf or on behalf of a designated aggregation unit pursuant to Commentary .09(d), for each such account that holds an equity option position subject to the Exemption in excess of the levels specified in Phlx Rule 1001, the net delta and the options contract equivalent of the net delta of such position. 20 Phlx Rule 1003 requires, among other things, that members report to the Exchange aggregate long or short positions on the same side of the market of 200 or more contracts of any single class of options contracts dealt in on the Exchange. The Exchange and other self-regulatory organizations are working on modifying the Large Options Position Report (“LOPR”) system and/or OCC reports to allow a member to indicate that an equity options position is delta neutral. *Records.* Under proposed Commentary .09(g) to Phlx Rule 1001, each member relying on the Exemption would be required to
(i)retain, and would be required to undertake reasonable efforts to ensure that any non-member affiliate of the member relying on the exemption retains, a list of the options, securities and other instruments underlying each options position net delta calculation reported to the Exchange hereunder, and
(ii)produce such information to the Exchange upon request. 21 21 A member would be authorized to report position information of its non-member affiliate pursuant to the written statement required under proposed Commentary .09(e)(3)(ii) to Phlx Rule 1001. *Reliance on Federal Oversight.* As provided under proposed Commentary .09(c) of Phlx Rule 1001, a permitted pricing model includes proprietary pricing models used by members and affiliates that have been approved by the Commission, the Fed or another federal financial regulator. In adopting the proposed Exemption, the Exchange would be relying upon the rigorous approval processes and ongoing oversight of a federal financial regulator. The Exchange notes that it would not be under any obligation to verify whether a member's or its affiliate's use of a proprietary pricing model is appropriate or yielding accurate results. The Exchange will announce the operative date of the proposed rule change in a regulatory circular to be published no later than 30 days after the Commission issues a release regarding the proposal herein. The operative date shall be no later than 15 days after publication of the regulatory circular. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act, 22 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 23 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, 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. The Exchange believes the proposed delta neutral-based hedge exemption from equity options position and exercise limits is appropriate in that it is based on a widely accepted risk management method used in options trading. Also, the Commission has previously stated its support for recognizing options positions hedged on a delta neutral basis as properly exempted from position limits. 24 22 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 23 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 24 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40594 (October 23, 1998), 63 FR 59362, 59380 (November 3, 1998) (S7-30-97) (adopting rules relating to OTC Derivatives Dealers). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others No written comments were either solicited or received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change does not:
(1)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)become operative for 30 days after the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 25 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 26 25 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 26 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. 27 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 28 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because such waiver would allow the Exchange to implement the delta hedging exemption from equity options position limits without needless delay. The Commission notes that it recently approved a substantially similar proposal filed by the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated. 29 The Commission believes that Phlx's proposal to create a delta hedging exemption from equity options position limits raises no new issues. For these reasons, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing with the Commission. 30 27 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied the five-day pre-filing notice requirement. 28 *Id* . 29 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56970 (December 14, 2007), 72 FR 72428 (December 20, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-99). 30 For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2008-07 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2008-07. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of Phlx. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2008-07 and should be submitted on or before March 21, 2008. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority. 31 31 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-3843 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #11176 and #11177] Alabama Disaster Number AL-00012 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of Alabama dated 02/21/2008. *Incident:* Severe storm and tornadoes. *Incident Period:* 02/05/2008 through 02/06/2008. DATES: *Effective Date:* 02/21/2008. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/21/2008. *Economic Injury
(EIDL)Loan Application Deadline Date:* 11/21/2008. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing And Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Lawrence Walker *Contiguous Counties:* Alabama: Blount, Colbert, Cullman, Fayette, Franklin, Jefferson, Lauderdale, Limestone, Marion, Morgan, Tuscaloosa, Winston *The Interest Rates are:* Percent Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere 5.500 Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.750 Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere 8.000 Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere 4.000 Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere 5.250 Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere 4.000 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 11176 C and for economic injury is 11177 0. The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is Alabama. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Dated: February 21, 2008. Steven C. Preston, Administrator. [FR Doc. E8-3847 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #11174 and #11175] Alabama Disaster Number AL-00013 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of ALABAMA dated 02/21/2008. *Incident:* Severe Storms and Tornadoes. *Incident Period:* 02/17/2008. DATES: *Effective Date:* 02/21/2008. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/21/2008. *Economic Injury
(EIDL)Loan Application Deadline Date:* 11/21/2008. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to : U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Autauga Autauga *Contiguous Counties:* Alabama: Chilton, Dallas, Elmore, Lowndes, Montgomery *The Interest Rates are:* Percent Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere 5.500 Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.750 Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere 8.000 Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere 4.000 Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere 5.250 Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere 4.000 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 11174 C and for economic injury is 11175 0. The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is Alabama. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Dated: February 21, 2008. Steven C. Preston, Administrator. [FR Doc. E8-3849 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #11166] Arkansas Disaster Number AR-00016 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 1. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Arkansas (FEMA-1744-DR), dated 02/07/2008. *Incident:* Severe Storms, Tornadoes, and Flooding. *Incident Period:* 02/05/2008 and continuing. DATES: *Effective Date:* 02/20/2008. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/07/2008. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing And Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of Arkansas, dated 02/07/2008, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster. *Primary Counties:* Newton Marion All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) James E. Rivera, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-3855 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #11169 and #11170] Arkansas Disaster Number AR-00015 AGENCY: Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 3. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Arkansas (FEMA-1744-DR), dated 02/08/2008. *Incident:* Severe Storms, Tornadoes, and Flooding. *Incident Period:* 02/05/2008 and continuing through 02/12/2008. DATES: *Effective Date:* 02/12/2008. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/08/2008. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:* 11/10/2008. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the State of Arkansas, dated 02/08/2008 is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 02/05/2008 and continuing through 02/12/2008. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) James E. Rivera, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-3856 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #11166] Arkansas Disaster Number AR-00016 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 2. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of ARKANSAS (FEMA-1744-DR), dated 02/07/2008. *Incident:* Severe Storms, Tornadoes, and Flooding. *Incident Period:* 02/05/2008 through 02/12/2008. DATES: *Effective Date:* 02/12/2008. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/07/2008. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of ARKANSAS, dated 02/07/2008, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 02/05/2008 and continuing through 02/12/2008. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) James E. Rivera, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-3857 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #11169 and #11170] Arkansas Disaster Number AR-00015 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 2. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Arkansas (FEMA-1744-DR), dated 02/08/2008. *Incident:* Severe storms, tornadoes, and flooding. *Incident Period:* 02/05/2008 and continuing. DATES: *Effective Date:* 02/20/2008. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/08/2008. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:* 11/10/2008. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster declaration for the State of Arkansas , dated 02/08/2008 is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Marion, Union. *Contiguous Counties:* Arkansas: Ashley, Boone, Bradley, Calhoun, Columbia, Ouachita. Louisiana: Claiborne, Morehouse, Union. Missouri: Taney. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) James E. Rivera, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-3860 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #11160 and #11161] Indiana Disaster Number IN-00017 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 1. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Indiana (FEMA-1740-DR), dated 01/30/2008. *Incident:* Severe Storms and Flooding. *Incident Period:* 01/07/2008 and continuing. DATES: *Effective Date:* 02/21/2008. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 03/31/2008. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:* 10/30/2008. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing And Disbursement Center, 4925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster declaration for the State of INDIANA dated 01/30/2008is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Allen, Benton, De Kalb, Huntington, Kosciusko, Lake, La Porte, Newton, Noble, St. Joseph, Starke, Whitley. *Contiguous Counties:* Illinois: Cook, Iroquois, Kankakee, Vermilion, Will. Indiana: Adams, Grant, Steuben, Wells. Michigan: Berrien. Ohio: Defiance, Paulding, Van Wert, Williams. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Herbert L. Mitchell, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-3851 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #11178 and #11179] Kentucky Disaster Number KY-00013 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the Commonwealth of Kentucky (FEMA-1746-DR), dated 02/21/2008. *Incident:* Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Straight-line Winds, and Flooding *Incident Period:* 02/05/2008 through 02/06/2008 DATES: *Effective Date:* 02/21/2008 *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/21/2008. *Economic Injury
(EIDL)Loan Application Deadline Date:* 11/21/2008. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 02/21/2008, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans):* Allen, Christian, Fayette, Hardin, Hart, Meade, Mercer, Monroe, Muhlenberg. *Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only):* Kentucky: Anderson, Barren, Bourbon, Boyle, Breckinridge, Bullitt, Butler, Caldwell, Clark, Cumberland, Edmonson, Garrard, Grayson, Green, Hopkins, Jefferson, Jessamine, Larue, Logan, Madison, Mclean, Metcalfe, Nelson, Ohio, Scott, Simpson, Todd, Trigg, Warren, Washington, Woodford. Indiana: Crawford, Harrison, Perry. Tennessee: Clay, Macon, Montgomery Stewart, Sumner. The Interest Rates are: Percent For Physical Damage: Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere 5.500 Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.750 Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere 8.000 Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere 5.250 Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere 4.000 For Economic Injury: Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere 4.000 The Number Assigned to this Disaster for Physical Damage is 11178C and for Economic Injury Is 111790. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Herbert L. Mitchell, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-3870 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #11167 and #11168] Tennessee Disaster Number TN-00018 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration. ACTION: Amendment 2. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Tennessee (FEMA-1745-DR), dated 02/07/2008. *Incident:* Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Straight-Line Winds, and Flooding. *Incident Period:* 02/05/2008 through 02/06/2008. DATES: *Effective Date:* 02/20/2008. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:* 04/07/2008. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:* 11/07/2008. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster declaration for the State of Tennessee dated 02/07/2008 is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Fayette. *Contiguous Counties:* Mississippi: Benton. All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) James E. Rivera, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. [FR Doc. E8-3859 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION. National Small Business Development Center Advisory Board; Public Meeting Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix 2, section 10(a)(2), notice is hereby given that the U.S. Small Business Administration's (SBA), National Small Business Development Center
(SBDC)Advisory Board, will be hosting a public board meeting to discuss such matters that may be presented by members, and the staff of the U.S. Small Business Administration. The meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, March 4, 2008 from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern Standard Time at the SBA Office of Small Business Investment Companies
(SBIC)Conference Room, 6th Floor, 409 Third Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416. The purpose of the meeting is to meet with and welcome a new board member and to facilitate board briefings with the Administrator, senior staff, and SBA program offices. The meeting is open to the public however advance notice of attendance is requested. Anyone wishing to attend the meeting must contact Alanna Falcone by Friday, February 29, 2008 by e-mail at *alanna.falcone@sba.gov* or fax
(202)481-0134. Shorter than usual notice is being provided by SBA in order for the SBDC Advisory Board to convene during the same week as other meetings and conferences which will bring a substantial representation from the SBA SBDC grantee community to the DC area. Cherylyn LeBon, Assistant Administrator for Intergovernmental Affairs, SBA Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E8-3872 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION National Small Business Development Center Advisory Board; Public Meeting Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix 2, section 10(a)(2), notice is hereby given that the U.S. Small Business Administration's
(SBA)National Small Business Development Center Advisory Board will be hosting a public meeting via conference call. The meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 1 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the follow-up issues from a March 4, 2008 Board meeting and an ASBDC Spring Conference on March 3-7, 2008 in Washington, DC. The meeting is open to the public however advance notice of attendance is requested. Anyone wishing to attend the meeting or make an oral presentation to the board must contact Alanna Falcone by Monday, March 17, 2008 by e-mail at *alanna.falcone@sba.gov* or fax to
(202)481-0134, for the conference call phone number and passcode. Cherylyn LeBon, Assistant Administrator for Intergovernmental Affairs, SBA Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E8-3876 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request The Social Security Administration
(SSA)publishes a list of information collection packages requiring clearance by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)in compliance with Public Law (Pub. L.) 104-13, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, effective October 1, 1995. The information collection packages included in this notice are for new information collections, approval of existing information collections, revisions to OMB-approved information collections and extensions (no change) of OMB-approved information collections. SSA is soliciting comments on the accuracy of the Agency's burden estimate; the need for the information; its practical utility; ways to enhance its quality, utility and clarity; and ways to minimize the burden on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Written comments and recommendations regarding the information collection(s) should be submitted to the OMB Desk Officer and the SSA Reports Clearance Officer. The information can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to the individuals at the addresses and fax numbers listed below: (OMB), Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for SSA, Fax: 202-395-6974, E-mail address: *OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov* . (SSA), Social Security Administration, DCBFM, Attn: Reports Clearance Officer, 1333 Annex Building, 6401 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21235, Fax: 410-965-6400, E-mail address: *OPLM.RCO@ssa.gov.* The information collections listed below have been submitted to OMB for clearance. Your comments on the information collections would be most useful if OMB and SSA receive them within 30 days from the date of this publication. You can obtain a copy of the OMB clearance packages by calling the SSA Reports Clearance Officer at 410-965-0454, or by writing to the address listed above. 1. Agreement to Sell Property—20 CFR 416.1240-1245—0960-0127. Individuals or couples who are otherwise eligible for Supplemental Security Income
(SSI)benefits but whose resources exceed the allowable limit may receive conditional payments if they agree to dispose of the excess non-liquid resources and make repayment. SSA uses form SSA-8060 to document this agreement and to ensure the individuals understand their obligations. Respondents are applicants for and recipients of SSI benefits who will be disposing of excess non-liquid resources. *Type of Request:* Extension of an OMB-approved information collection. *Number of Respondents:* 20,000. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden per Response:* 10 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 3,333 hours. 2. Listing of Impairments—Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix I and II—0960-0642. Background The Listing of Impairments (the listings), Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix I and II, describes, for each of the major body systems, impairments which are severe enough to prevent a person from doing any gainful activity. As part of the listings, we provide a preface identifying specific requirements which affect the body system, such as documentation requirements and other factors to consider when evaluating impairments within that body system, including medical and other evidence. This clearance request covers Appendix 1 to Subpart P of part 404. The Information Collection State Disability Determination Services
(DDS)use the documented medical evidence described in the listings to assess the alleged disability. DDS use this information, together with other evidence, to determine if an individual claiming disability benefits has an impairment that meets severity and duration requirements. The respondents are disability applicants and other sources of evidence. The Information Collection Requests for the various forms the public uses to submit medical and other evidence to SSA includes the burden imposed by these regulations. We are reporting no burden for this regulation aside from a 1-hour placeholder burden. *Type of Request:* Extension of an OMB-approved information collection. 3. Reporting Events-SSI—20 CFR 416.701-.732—0960-0128. SSI applicants, recipients, and/or their representative payees must report any changed circumstances that could affect their eligibility for SSI payments or the payment amount. SSA uses the information, reported on Form SSA-8150, to determine if SSI benefits should continue or if the payment amount should be changed. The respondents are applicants for or recipients of SSI benefits or their representative payees. *Type of Request:* Extension of an OMB-approved information collection. *Number of Respondents:* 27,320. *Frequency of Response:* 1. *Average Burden per Response:* 5 minutes. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 2,277 hours. 4. Application for a Social Security Card—20 CFR 422.103-.110—0960-0066. SSA collects information on Forms SS-5 (used in the United States) and SS-5-FS (used outside the United States) to issue original or replacement Social Security cards. SSA is revising the race/ethnicity question on the forms to comply with Office of Management and Budget standards. Additionally, SSA is making several other minor changes to the form's instructions. The respondents are applicants for original and replacement Social Security cards. *Type of Request:* Revision to an OMB approved information collection. Application scenario Number of annual respondents Completion time (minutes) Burden hours Respondents who do not have to provide parents' social security numbers
(SSNs)13,000,000 8 1/2 1,841,667 Respondents who are asked to provide parents' SSNs (for application for original SSN cards for children under age 18) 540,000 9 81,000 Applicants age 12 or older who need to answer additional questions so SSA can determine whether an SSN was previously assigned 40,000 9 1/2 6,333 Applicants asking for a replacement SSN card beyond the new allowable limits (i.e., who must provide additional documentation to accompany the application) 4,000 60 4,000 Totals 13,584,000 1,933,000 Dated: February 25, 2008. Elizabeth A. Davidson, Reports Clearance Officer, Social Security Administration. [FR Doc. E8-3871 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4191-02-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 6113] Advisory Committee on International Postal and Delivery Services AGENCY: Department of State. ACTION: Notice; FACA Committee meeting announcement. *Summary:* As required by the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, the Department of State gives notice of the inaugural meeting of the Advisory Committee on International Postal and Delivery Services. This Committee has been formed in fulfillment of the provisions of the 2006 Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (Pub. L. 109-435) and in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. *Public input:* Any member of the public interested in providing public input to the meeting should contact Mr. Chris Wood, whose contact information is listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice. Each individual providing oral input is requested to limit his or her comments to five minutes. Requests to be added to the speaker list must be received in writing (letter, e-mail or fax) prior to the close of business on March 18, 2008; written comments from members of the public for distribution at this meeting must reach Mr. Wood by letter, e-mail or fax by this same date. Agenda of the Meeting The agenda will include the following subjects: —Preparations for U.S. participation in the UPU Congress to take place in Geneva from July 23 to August 12, 2008. —Extra-territorial offices of exchange (ETOEs). —Performance measurement. —Customs clearance. *Date:* March 25, 2008 from 2 p.m. to about 5 p.m. (open to the public). *Location:* Room 1482, George C. Marshall Conference Center, Department of State, 2201 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20520. Individuals attending the Committee meeting should enter the State Department at the 21st Street entrance, where photo identification will be required to be displayed to Diplomatic Security before entering the building. One of the following forms of valid photo identification will be required for admission to the State Department building: U.S. driver's license, U.S. Government identification card, or any valid passport. For further information, please contact Christopher Wood, Office of Technical Specialized Agencies (IO/T), Bureau of International Organization Affairs, U.S. Department of State, at
(202)647-1044, *woodcs@state.gov.* Dated: February 21, 2008. Dennis M. Delehanty, Designated Federal Officer, Advisory Committee on International Postal and Delivery Services. Dated: February 21, 2008. Dennis M. Delehanty, Foreign Affairs Officer, Department of State. [FR Doc. E8-3939 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-19-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORATION Federal Highway Administration Environmental Impact Statement; Washoe County, NV AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of Intent. SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this notice to advise the public that an Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared for a proposed highway project in Washoe County, NV. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Abdelmoez Abdalla, Environmental Project Manager, Federal Highway Administration, 705 North Plaza Street, Suite 220, Carson City, Nevada 89701-0602, Telephone:
(775)687-1231; Mr. Steve Cooke, Chief, Environmental Service Division, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), 1263 S. Stewart Street, Carson City, Nevada 89712, Telephone:
(775)888-7686; or Mr. Doug Maloy, Project Manager, Regional Transportation Commission (RTC), 1105 Terminal Way, Suite 108, Reno, Nevada 89502, Telephone:
(775)335-1865. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FHWA, in cooperation with the NDOT, will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS)on a proposal to improve Pyramid Way (SR 44) from Queen Way to Calle de la Plata Drive and a proposal for a new corridor from Vista Boulevard to US-395 near the Parr/Dandini Interchange in Washoe County, Nevada. The FHWA will serve as the Lead Federal agency while the NDOT and the RTC will serve as Joint Lead Agencies. The new SAFETEA-LU environmental review process will be followed. The purpose of the proposed project is to address regional mobility, congestion, and safety challenges faced by motorists and pedestrians that travel Pyramid highway to Spanish Springs and Pyramid Lake. Improvements to the existing corridor (Pyramid Highway) are considered necessary to provide for the existing and projected traffic demand. There will be a “No Build Alternative” and “Build Alternatives” developed that may include improvements to existing Pyramid Highway from Queen Way to Calle de la Plata and a possible new roadway between US-395 and Vista Boulevard. Letters describing the proposed action and soliciting comments will be sent to appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, and to private organizations and citizens who have previously expressed or are known to have interest in this proposal. A formal scoping meeting will be held later this year or early next year. Public notice will be given of the time and place of the meeting. To ensure that the full range of issues related to this proposed action are addressed and all significant issues identified, comments, and suggestions are invited from all interested parties. Comments or questions concerning this proposed action and the EIS should be directed to the FHWA at the address provided above. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities apply to this program.) Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq.* , 49 CFR 1.48(d)(17), and 40 CFR 1501.7. Issued on: February 20, 2008. Susan E. Klekar, Division Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, Nevada Division, Carson City, Nevada. [FR Doc. 08-885 Filed 2-28-08; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 23
Traces to 23 documents
CFR
- Referral to the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS).§ 52.87
- Requirement to publish notice of intent and conduct scoping process.§ 51.26
- Administrative review of applications; hearings.§ 52.85
- Administrative review of applications.§ 52.51
- Radiological criteria for unrestricted use.§ 20.1402
- Expiration and termination of licenses and decommissioning of sites and separate buildings or outdoor areas.§ 30.36
- Expiration and termination of licenses and decommissioning of sites and separate buildings or outdoor areas.§ 40.42
- Relief from fingerprinting and criminal history records check for designated categories of individuals permitted unescorted access to certain radioactive materials or other property.§ 73.61
- Orders.§ 2.202
- Public inspections, exemptions, requests for withholding.§ 2.390
- Hearing requests, petitions to intervene, requirements for standing, and contentions.§ 2.309
- Filing of documents.§ 2.302
- Purpose and scope.§ 16.30
- Delegation of authority to Director of Division of Trading and Markets.§ 200.30-3
- NMS security designation and definitions.§ 242.600
- Scope of subpart.§ 416.701
- Social security numbers.§ 422.103
U.S. Code
register
18 references not yet in our index
- 10 CFR 52
- 10 CFR 2
- 10 CFR 51
- 10 CFR 30
- 10 CFR 40
- 10 CFR 20
- 49 CFR 1572
- 27 CFR 555
- 42 CFR 73
- 15 CFR 2007
- 17 CFR 240.19
- 27 CFR 240.19
- 13 CFR 240.19
- 20 CFR 416.1240-1245
- Pub. L. 92-463
- Pub. L. 109-435
- 49 CFR 1.48(d)(17)
- 40 CFR 1501.7
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment
Cite10 CFR 52
Cite10 CFR 2
Cite10 CFR 51
Cites 41 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources