50374 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 26, 2008 / Notices 

1Notice of United States Postal Service of Filing 

of Functionally Equivalent Global Expedited 

Package Services 1 Negotiated Service Agreement, 

August 14, 2008, filed in Docket Nos. CP2008–18, 

CP2008–19, CP2008–20, CP2008–21, CP2008–22, 

CP2008–23, and CP2008–24 (Notices). 

2 Docket No. CP2008–5, United States Postal 

Service Notice of Filing Redacted Copy of 

Governors’ Decision No. 08–7, July 23, 2008. 

3 Docket No. CP2008–5, Order Concerning Global 

Expedited Package Services Contracts, June 27, 

2008 (Order No. 86) at 7 (‘‘The Commission will 

verify whether or not any subsequent contract is in 

fact substantially equivalent. Contracts not having 

substantially the same terms and conditions as the 

GEPS 1 contract must be filed under 39 CFR part 

3020, subpart B.’’). 

4 Id. 

* The schedule for Commission 

meetings is subject to change on short 

notice. To verify the status of meetings, 

call (recording)—(301) 415–1292. 

Contact person for more information: 

Michelle Schroll, (301) 415–1662. 

* * * * * 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: By a vote of 4–

0 on August 20 and 21, 2008, the 

Commission determined pursuant to 

U.S.C. 552b(e) and § 9.107(a) of the 

Commission’s rules that Affirmation of 

‘‘Concerning Petitions to Intervene 

related to Entergy Nuclear Operations, 

Inc. (Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station), 

Application for Order Approving 

Indirect Transfer of Control of Licenses 

(filed July 30, 2007)’’ be held August 22, 

2008, and on less than one week’s 

notice to the public. 

Affirmation of ‘‘U.S. Department of 

Energy (High Level Waste Repository)—

Petitions of the State of Nevada and Dr. 

Jacob Paz to Reject the Department of 

Energy’s (DOE) Application to Construct 

a Geologic Repository at Yucca 

Mountain, Nevada (Tentative)’’ was 

announced on July 15, 2008, to be held 

on July 23, 2008 and subsequently was 

postponed. On August 12, 2008, the 

Affirmation was rescheduled and 

announced to be held on August 13, 

2008. This Affirmation was postponed 

again and has been rescheduled on 

Friday, August 22, 2008 at 9:35 a.m. 

The NRC Commission Meeting 

Schedule can be found on the Internet 

at: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/policymaking/schedule.html. 

The NRC provides reasonable 

accommodation to individuals with 

disabilities where appropriate. If you 

need a reasonable accommodation to 

participate in these public meetings, or 

need this meeting notice or the 

transcript or other information from the 

public meetings in another format (e.g. 

braille, large print), please notify the 

NRC’s Disability Program Coordinator, 

Rohn Brown, at 301–492–2279, TDD: 

301–415–2100, or by e-mail at 

REB3@nrc.gov. Determinations on 

requests for reasonable accommodation 

will be made on a case-by-case basis. 

This notice is distributed by mail to 

several hundred subscribers; if you no 

longer wish to receive it, or would like 

to be added to the distribution, please 

contact the Office of the Secretary, 

Washington, DC 20555 (301–415–1969). 

In addition, distribution of this meeting 

notice over the Internet system is 

available. If you are interested in 

receiving this Commission meeting 

schedule electronically, please send an 

electronic message to dkw@nrc.gov. 

Dated: August 21, 2008. 

R. Michelle Schroll, 

Office of the Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E8–19828 Filed 8–22–08; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

[Docket Nos. CP2008–18, CP2008–19, 

CP2008–20, CP2008–21, CP2008–22, 

CP2008–23, and CP2008–24; Order No. 100] 

Global Express Package Service 

Contracts 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing 

seven recently-filed Postal Service 

Global Express Package Service 

negotiated service agreements. This 

action is consistent with changes in a 

recent law governing postal operations. 

DATES: Comments due September 2, 

2008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 

202–789–6820 or 

stephen.sharfman@prc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

On August 14, 2008, the Postal 

Service filed seven identical notices, 

which have been assigned to Docket 

Nos. CP2008–18 through CP2008–24.1

These notices announce individual 

negotiated service agreements, namely, 

specific Global Express Package Service 

(GEPS) contracts the Postal Service has 

entered into with individual mailers. 

The Postal Service believes that each is 

functionally equivalent to the Global 

Express Package Services 1 (GEPS 1) 

product established in Docket No. 

CP2008–5. 

Docket No. CP2008–5. The Governor’s 

Decision supporting the GEPS 1 product 

was filed in consolidated Docket No. 

CP2008–5.2 In Order No. 86, the 

Commission established GEPS 1 as a 

product and held that additional 

contracts may be included as part of the 

GEPS 1 product if they meet the 

requirements of 39 U.S.C. 3633, and if 

they are substantially equivalent to the 

initial GEPS 1 contract filed in Docket 

No. CP2008–5.3 The GEPS 1 product 

provides volume-based incentives for 

mailers that send large volumes of 

Express Mail International (EMI) and/or 

Priority Mail International (PMI). 

Related contracts. The Postal Service 

contemporaneously filed the seven 

contracts in this docket pursuant to 39 

CFR 3015.5 and Order No. 86,4 asserting 

that they are substantially equivalent to 

the initial GEPS 1 contract filed with the 

Commission. In support of each of these 

dockets, the Postal Service also filed the 

contract and supporting material under 

seal. The Notices contain the Postal 

Service’s arguments that these contracts 

are substantially equivalent and that 

they exhibit similar cost and market 

characteristics. Notices at 3–5. The 

Postal Service also maintains that all 

seven contracts, by virtue of their terms, 

fit within the proposed MCS language 

for GEPS 1. Id. at 2. 

While maintaining that the contracts 

are substantially equivalent to the initial 

GEPS 1 contract filed, the Postal Service 

notes that the contracts may differ in 

minor respects, for example, prices may 

vary due to volume commitments, 

signing dates of the agreements, 

existence of previous agreements, and 

other case specific and negotiation 

related factors. Id. at 4–5. The Postal 

Service maintains, however, that 

‘‘[i]ncidental differences to 

accommodate the respective mailers do 

nothing to detract from the conclusion 

that these agreements are ‘functionally 

equivalent in all pertinent respects.’ ’’

Id. at 5. 

The Postal Service asks that the seven 

contracts be added to the existing GEPS 

1 product. Id. at 2 and 5. It further notes 

that the contracts are ‘‘set to expire one 

year after the Postal Service notifies the 

customer that all necessary approvals 

and reviews of the agreement have been 

obtained, culminating with a favorable 

conclusion on review by the 

Commission.’’ Id. at 2. 

II. Notice of Filings 

The Commission establishes Docket 

Nos. CP2008–18, CP2008–19, CP2008–

20, CP2008–21, CP2008–22, CP2008–23, 

and CP2008–24. In keeping with recent 

practice, these dockets are addressed on 

a consolidated basis for purposes of this 

Order; however, future filings should be 

made in the specific docket in which 


sroberts on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 26, 2008 / Notices 50375 

1 15 U.S.C. 78k–1. 

2 17 CFR 242.608. 

3On July 6, 2001, the Commission approved the 

OLPP, which was originally proposed by the Amex, 

CBOE, ISE, OCC, Phlx, and Pacific Exchange, Inc. 

(k/n/a NYSE Arca). See Securities Exchange Act 

Release No. 44521, 66 FR 36809 (July 13, 2001). On 

February 5, 2004, BSE was added as a sponsor to 

the OLPP. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 

49199, 69 FR 7030 (February 12, 2004). On March 

21, 2008, Nasdaq was added as a sponsor to the 

OLPP. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 

57546 (March 21, 2008), 73 FR 16393 (March 27, 

2008). 

4A proposed amendment may be put into effect 

summarily upon publication of notice of such 

amendment, on a temporary basis not to exceed 120 

days, if the Commission finds that such action is 

necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for 

the protection of investors or the maintenance of 

fair and orderly markets, to remove impediments to, 

and perfect the mechanism of, a national market 

system or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes 

of the Act. See 17 CFR 242.608(b)(4). 

5 In approving this amendment, the Commission 

has considered its impact on efficiency, 

competition, and capital formation. See U.S.C. 

78c(f). 

6 15 U.S.C. 78k–1. 

7 17 CFR 242.608(b)(4). 

issues being addressed pertain. The 

public portions of these filings can be 

accessed via the Commission’s Web 

site(http://www.prc.gov). 

Interested persons may express views 

and offer comments on whether the 

planned changes are consistent with the 

policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 

3642. Comments are due no later than 

September 2, 2008. 

The Commission appoints Michael 

Ravnitzky to serve as Public 

Representative in the captioned filings. 

III. Ordering Paragraphs 

It is Ordered: 

1. The Commission establishes Docket 

Nos. CP2008–18, CP2008–19, CP2008–

20, CP2008–21, CP2008–22, CP2008–23, 

and CP2008–24 for consideration of the 

matters raised in each docket. 

2. Comments on issues in these 

proceedings are due no later than 

September 2, 2008. 

3. The Commission appoints Michael 

Ravnitzky as Public Representative to 

represent the interests of the general 

public in this proceeding. 

4. The Secretary shall arrange for 

publication of this Order in the Federal 

Register. 

Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3633; 39 CFR 3020.33. 

By the Commission. 

Dated: August 20, 2008. 

Judith M. Grady, 

Acting Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E8–19679 Filed 8–25–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–58385; File No. 4–443] 

Joint Industry Plan; Notice of Filing 

and Order Approving on a Temporary 

Basis Amendment No. 2 to the Plan for 

the Purpose of Developing and 

Implementing Procedures Designed to 

Facilitate the Listing and Trading of 

Standardized Options 

August 19, 2008. 

I. Introduction 

On August 12, 2008, August 18, 2008, 

August 15, 2008, August 13, 2008, 

August 8, 2008, August 14, 2008, 

August 14, 2008, and August 18, 2008, 

the American Stock Exchange LLC 

(‘‘Amex’’), the Boston Stock Exchange, 

Inc. (‘‘BSE’’), Chicago Board Options 

Exchange, Incorporated (‘‘CBOE’’), the 

International Securities Exchange, LLC 

(‘‘ISE’’), The NASDAQ Stock Market 

LLC (‘‘Nasdaq’’), NYSE Arca Inc. 

(‘‘NYSE Arca’’), the Philadelphia Stock 

Exchange, Inc. (‘‘Phlx’’), and the 

Options Clearing Corporation (‘‘OCC’’), 

respectively, filed with the Securities 

and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to section 

11A of the Securities Exchange Act 1 of 

1934 (‘‘Act’’) and Rule 608 thereunder,2

Amendment No. 2 to the Plan for the 

Purpose of Developing and 

Implementing Procedures Designed to 

Facilitate the Listing and Trading of 

Standardized Options (‘‘the Options 

Listing Procedures Plan’’ or ‘‘OLPP’’).3

The amendment would provide a 

uniform minimum volume threshold 

per underlying class to qualify for the 

introduction of a new expiration year of 

Long-term Equity AnticiPation 

Securities (‘‘LEAPS’’ or ‘‘LEAP’’) 

options. This order summarily puts into 

effect Amendment No. 2 on a temporary 

basis not to exceed 120 days and solicits 

comment on Amendment No. 2 from 

interested persons.4

II. Description of the Proposed 

Amendment 

Amendment No. 2 proposes to apply 

a uniform minimum volume threshold 

per underlying class to qualify for the 

introduction of a new expiration year of 

LEAP options. Currently, Participant 

Exchanges may list a new LEAP 

expiration year at the appropriate time 

without any consideration as to the 

activity level of the class of options. 

By agreeing to a minimum volume 

threshold per underlying class to qualify 

for an additional year of LEAP series, 

the Participant Exchanges intend to 

mitigate the number of option series 

available for trading. It is intended that 

this will in turn mitigate quote traffic, 

because Participants will not be 

submitting quotes in the not-listed 

series. The Plan Sponsors have agreed 

on a minimum volume threshold of 

1,000 contracts national average daily 

volume in the preceding three calendar 

months (excluding volume in LEAP and 

FLEX series) to qualify for the 

introduction of a new LEAP expiration 

year. 

In 2007, if this proposal had been in 

effect, the industry would have not 

added a new expiration year in 550 

underlying securities, which would 

have reduced the overall number of 

listed series (LEAP and non-LEAP 

series) by 8%. These LEAP series 

generated only .43% of industry trading 

volume in a typical (non-expiration) 

sample week. The Exchanges agree that 

the benefit from reduced quoting levels 

greatly exceeds the small cost in missed 

business. 

The Amendment does not restrict the 

introduction of a new LEAP expiration 

year in Index options, or in classes that 

have had options products trading at 

any exchange for less than six months. 

It also does not restrict, for a particular 

options class, the introduction of new 

LEAP series with an expiration year that 

has already been introduced by at least 

one Exchange. 

The Commission directed the thencurrent options exchanges to act jointly 

to develop strategies to address overall 

capacity concerns in an Order dated 

September 8, 1999, as confirmed in a 

letter from the Director of the Division 

of Market Regulation dated September 

13, 2000. This Amendment is an 

additional strategy to meet this goal. 

III. Discussion 

After careful consideration, the 

Commission finds that the proposed 

amendment to the OLPP is consistent 

with the requirements of the Act and the 

rules and regulations thereunder.5 In 

particular, the Commission finds that 

the proposed amendment is consistent 

with the provisions of Section 11A of 

the Act 6 and Rule 608 of Regulation 

NMS thereunder,7 in that it is 

appropriate in the public interest, for 

the protection of investors and the 

maintenance of fair and orderly markets. 

Specifically, the Commission believes 

that adopting a uniform minimum 

volume threshold per underlying class 

to qualify for the introduction of a new 

expiration year of LEAP options will 

reduce the number of option series 

available for trading, and thus may 

reduce increases in the options quote 

rate because market participants will 

not be submitting quotes in those series. 

In addition, the Commission finds that 

it is appropriate to put Amendment No. 


sroberts on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES