11918 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 14, 2007 / Notices 

area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and 

changes surveillance requirements. The 

NRC staff has determined that the 

amendment involves no significant 

increase in the amounts and no 

significant change in the types of any 

effluents that may be released offsite, 

and that there is no significant increase 

in individual or cumulative 

occupational radiation exposure. The 

Commission has previously issued a 

proposed finding that the amendment 

involves no significant hazards 

consideration, and there has been [(1) 

no public comment on such finding (2) 

the following comments with 

subsequent disposition by the NRC staff 

([xx FR xxxxx, DATE]). Accordingly, the 

amendment meets the eligibility criteria 

for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 

CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 

51.22(b) no environmental impact 

statement or environmental assessment 

need be prepared in connection with the 

issuance of the amendment. 

6.0 Conclusion 

The Commission has concluded, 

based on the considerations discussed 

above, that (1) there is reasonable 

assurance that the health and safety of 

the public will not be endangered by 

operation in the proposed manner, (2) 

such activities will be conducted in 

compliance with the Commission’s 

regulations, and (3) the issuance of the 

amendments will not be inimical to the 

common defense and security or to the 

health and safety of the public. 

The proposed changes are consistent 

with NRC practices and policies as 

generally reflected in the STS and as 

reflected by applicable precedents that 

have been approved. Therefore, the NRC 

staff has determined that the proposed 

changes to STS 3.7.5 should be 

approved. 

Model No Significant Hazards 

Consideration Determination 

Description of amendment request: 

The requested change, applicable to all 

pressurized water reactors (PWRs) 

designed by Babcock and Wilcox 

(B&W), Westinghouse, and Combustion 

Engineering (CE), would provide 

changes to the Actions in the Standard 

Technical Specifications (STS) relating 

to One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven 

Auxiliary Feedwater/Emergency 

Feedwater (AFW/EFW) Pump 

Inoperable. The proposed change is 

described in Technical Specification 

Task Force (TSTF) Standard TS Change 

Traveler TSTF–412, Revision 3, and was 

described in the Notice of Availability 

published in the Federal Register on 

[DATE] ([xx FR xxxxx]). 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: As 

required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), an analysis 

of the issue of no significant hazards 

consideration is presented below: 

1. Does the proposed change involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of any accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The Auxiliary/Emergency Feedwater 

(AFW/EFW) System is not an initiator of any 

design basis accident or event, and therefore 

the proposed changes do not increase the 

probability of any accident previously 

evaluated. The proposed changes to address 

the condition of one or two motor driven 

AFW/EFW trains inoperable and the turbine 

driven AFW/EFW train inoperable due to one 

steam supply inoperable do not change the 

response of the plant to any accidents. 

The proposed changes do not adversely 

affect accident initiators or precursors nor 

alter the design assumptions, conditions, and 

configuration of the facility or the manner in 

which the plant is operated and maintained. 

The proposed changes do not adversely affect 

the ability of structures, systems, and 

components (SSCs) to perform their intended 

safety function to mitigate the consequences 

of an initiating event within the assumed 

acceptance limits. The proposed changes do 

not affect the source term, containment 

isolation, or radiological release assumptions 

used in evaluating the radiological 

consequences of any accident previously 

evaluated. Further, the proposed changes do 

not increase the types and amounts of 

radioactive effluent that may be released 

offsite, nor significantly increase individual 

or cumulative occupational/public radiation 

exposures. 

Therefore, the changes do not involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of any accident previously 

evaluated. 

2. Does the proposed change create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed changes do not result in a 

change in the manner in which the AFW/ 

EFW System provides plant protection. The 

AFW/EFW System will continue to supply 

water to the steam generators to remove 

decay heat and other residual heat by 

delivering at least the minimum required 

flow rate to the steam generators. There are 

no design changes associated with the 

proposed changes. The changes to the 

Conditions and Required Actions do not 

change any existing accident scenarios, nor 

create any new or different accident 

scenarios. 

The changes do not involve a physical 

alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or 

different type of equipment will be installed) 

or a change in the methods governing normal 

plant operation. In addition, the changes do 

not impose any new or different 

requirements or eliminate any existing 

requirements. The changes do not alter 

assumptions made in the safety analysis. The 

proposed changes are consistent with the 

safety analysis assumptions and current plant 

operating practice. 

Therefore, the changes do not create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed change involve a 

significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed changes do not alter the 

manner in which safety limits, limiting safety 

system settings or limiting conditions for 

operation are determined. The safety analysis 

acceptance criteria are not impacted by these 

changes. The proposed changes will not 

result in plant operation in a configuration 

outside the design basis. 

Therefore, it is concluded that the 

proposed change does not involve a 

significant reduction in a margin of safety. 

Based on the above, the proposed 

change involves no significant hazards 

consideration under the standards set 

forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and 

accordingly, a finding of no significant 

hazards consideration is justified. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this xx day 

of xxxxxxx, 2007. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Project Manager. 

Plant Licensing Branch [ ], Division of 

Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of 

Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. E7–4675 Filed 3–13–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

POSTAL SERVICE 

Board of Governors; Sunshine Act 

Meeting 

Board Votes To Close March 6, 2007, 

Meeting 

At its teleconference meeting on 

February 27, 2007, the Board of 

Governors of the United States Postal 

Service voted unanimously to close to 

public observation its meeting 

scheduled for March 6, 2007, in 

Washington, DC, via teleconference. The 

Board determined that prior public 

notice was not possible. 

ITEM CONSIDERED: Postal Regulatory 

Commission Opinion and 

Recommended Decision in Docket No. 

R2006–1, Postal Rate and Fee Changes. 

GENERAL COUNSEL CERTIFICATION: The 

General Counsel of the United States 

Postal Service has certified that the 

meeting was properly closed under the 

Government in the Sunshine Act. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Requests for information about the 

meeting should be addressed to the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 14, 2007 / Notices 11919 

1Applicants also request relief with respect to 

any future series of the Company for which the 

Adviser serves as investment adviser (included in 

the term ‘‘Fund of Funds.’’). 

2The Underlying Funds may include UITs 

(‘‘Underlying Trusts’’) and open-end management 

investment companies (‘‘Underlying Management 

Companies’’) that have received exemptive relief to 

sell their shares on a national securities exchange 

at negotiated prices (‘‘ETFs’’). Shares of an ETF also 

may be purchased from the ETF in large 

aggregations by delivering a basket of specified 

securities to the ETF, and large aggregations of 

shares may be redeemed from an ETF in exchange 

for a basket of specified securities (‘‘In-kind ETF 

Purchases and Redemptions’’). 

3All Funds of Funds that currently intend to rely 

on the requested order are named as applicants. 

Any other investment company that relies on the 

order in the future will comply with the terms and 

conditions of the order. 

Secretary of the Board, Wendy A. 

Hocking, at (202) 268–4800. 

Wendy A. Hocking, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 07–1234 Filed 3–12–07; 3:49 pm] 

BILLING CODE 7710–12–M 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. IC–27749; 812–13295] 

The RBB Fund, Inc. and Abundance 

Technologies, Inc.; Notice of 

Application 

March 8, 2007. 

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’). 

ACTION: Notice of application for an 

order under section 12(d)(1)(J) of the 

Investment Company Act of 1940 

(‘‘Act’’) for an exemption from sections 

12(d)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act and under 

sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an 

exemption from section 17(a) of the Act. 

SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: The order 

would permit certain series of a 

registered open-end management 

investment company to acquire shares 

of registered open-end management 

investment companies and unit 

investment trusts (‘‘UITs’’) that are 

outside the same group of investment 

companies. 

APPLICANTS: The RBB Fund, Inc. (the 

‘‘Company’’) and Abundance 

Technologies, Inc. (the ‘‘Adviser’’). 

FILING DATES: The application was filed 

on May 23, 2006 and amended on 

March 6, 2007. 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 

applicants with a copy of the request, 

personally or by mail. Hearing requests 

should be received by the Commission 

by 5:30 p.m. April 2, 2007, and should 

be accompanied by proof of service on 

applicants, in the form of an affidavit, 

or for lawyers, a certificate of service. 

Hearing requests should state the nature 

of the writer’s interest, the reason for the 

request, and the issues contested. 

Persons who wish to be notified of a 

hearing may request notification by 

writing to the Commission’s Secretary. 

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities 

and Exchange Commission, 100 F 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549–

1090; Applicants, The RBB Fund, Inc., 

400 Bellevue Parkway, Wilmington, DE 

19809 and Abundance Technologies, 

Inc., 3700 Park 42 Drive, Suite 105A, 

Cincinnati, OH 42141. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: 

Jean E. Minarick, Senior Counsel, at 

(202) 551–6811, or Janet M. Grossnickle, 

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 Public 

Reference Desk, U.S. Securities and 

Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, 

NE., Washington DC 20549–0102 

(telephone (202) 551–5850). 

Applicants’ Representations 

1. The Company is a Maryland 

corporation and an open-end 

management investment company 

registered under the Act that is 

comprised of eighteen separate series 

advised by various investment advisers, 

including the Adviser. The Company 

intends to establish three new series: 

Free Market U.S. Equity Fund, Free 

Market International Equity Fund and 

Free Market Fixed-Income Fund, each of 

which will be advised by the Adviser 

(each such series, a ‘‘Fund of Funds’’).1

2. Applicants request relief to permit 

a Fund of Funds to acquire shares of 

registered open-end management 

investment companies or UITs that are 

not part of the same group of investment 

companies as defined in Section 

12(d)(1)(G)(ii) of the Act as the Fund of 

Funds (‘‘Underlying Funds’’) 2 and the 

Underlying Funds to sell such shares to 

the Fund of Funds. Applicants also 

apply for an order pursuant to section 

6(c) and section 17(b) of the Act 

exempting Applicants from section 

17(a) of the Act to the extent necessary 

to permit purchases and redemptions by 

a Fund of Funds of shares of the 

Underlying Funds and to permit the 

Underlying Funds to sell or redeem 

their shares in transactions with the 

Funds of Funds.3 Applicants state that 

each Fund of Funds will provide an 

efficient and simple method of allowing 

investors, with minimal investments, to 

create a comprehensive asset allocation 

program. 

3. The Adviser, a privately-held Ohio 

corporation, is registered under the 

Investment Advisers Act of 1940. The 

Adviser serves, and will serve, as 

investment adviser to the Funds of 

Funds. 

Applicants’ Legal Analysis 

A. Section 12(d)(1) 

1. Section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act 

prohibits a registered investment 

company from acquiring shares of an 

investment company if the securities 

represent more than 3% of the total 

outstanding voting stock of the acquired 

company, more than 5% of the total 

assets of the acquiring company, or, 

together with the securities of any other 

investment companies, more than 10% 

of the total assets of the acquiring 

company. Section 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act 

prohibits a registered open-end 

investment company, its principal 

underwriter and any broker or dealer 

from selling the shares of the investment 

company to another investment 

company if the sale will cause the 

acquiring company to own more than 

3% of the acquired company’s voting 

stock, or if the sale will cause more than 

10% of the acquired company’s voting 

stock to be owned by investment 

companies generally. 

2. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act 

provides that the Commission may 

exempt any person, security, or 

transaction, or any class or classes of 

persons, securities or transactions, from 

any provision of section 12(d)(1) if the 

exemption is consistent with the public 

interest and the protection of investors. 

Applicants seek an exemption under 

section 12(d)(1)(J) to permit the Funds 

of Funds to acquire shares of 

Underlying Funds and to permit the 

Underlying Funds, their principal 

underwriters and any broker or dealer to 

sell shares of the Underlying Funds to 

the Funds of Funds beyond the limits 

set forth in sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (B) 

of the Act. 

3. Applicants state that the proposed 

arrangement will not give rise to the 

policy concerns underlying sections 

12(d)(1)(A) and (B), which include 

concerns about undue influence by a 

fund of funds over underlying funds, 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES