[Federal Register: January 3, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 1)]
[Notices]
[Page 105-106]
[DOCID:fr03ja06-65]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP02-60-008]

Trunkline LNG Company, LLC; Notice of Compliance Filing

December 27, 2005.
    Take notice that on December 15, 2005, Trunkline LNG Company, LLC
(Trunkline LNG) submitted a compliance filing pursuant to the
Commission's orders issued on August 27, 2002, December 18, 2002, and
October 27, 2003 in Docket Nos. CP02-60-000, CP02-60-001 and CP02-60-
003, respectively.
    Trunkline LNG states that the compliance filing includes tariff
sheets to place Rate Schedules FTS-2 and ITS-2 in service upon
completion of the Amended Expansion Project.
    Trunkline LNG states that copies of the filing were served on
parties on the official service list.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule

211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR
385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve
to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests must be
filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a protest
must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Protest Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on January 12, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-8187 Filed 12-30-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 208 (Thursday, October 27, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 74664-74666]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25657]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9318; Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-031-AD;
Amendment 39-18695; AD 2016-22-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Models DA 40 NG, DA 42 NG, and DA 42
M-NG airplanes. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) issued by the aviation authority of another country
to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The
MCAI describes the unsafe condition as cracked autopilot bridle cable
clamps. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these
products

DATES: This AD is effective November 16, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 16,
2016.
    We must receive comments on this AD by December 12, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Diamond
Aircraft Industries GmbH, N.A. Otto-Stra[szlig]e 5, A-2700 Wiener
Neustadt, Austria, telephone: +43 2622 26700; fax: +43 2622 26780;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: http://www.diamondaircraft.com.
You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (816)
329-4148. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9318.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9318; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
(800) 647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available
in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued AD
No. 2016-0190, dated September 26, 2016 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    During an inspection of the pitch and roll control system of an
aeroplane, cracked autopilot bridle cable clamps were discovered.
Over[hyphen]torqueing has been determined as a possible reason for
the cracking.
    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to detachment of
the clamps from the control system, possibly resulting in reduced
control of the aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Diamond Aircraft
Industries (DAI) issued Recommended Service Bulletins DAI RSB
40NG[hyphen]048, DAI RSB 42NG[hyphen]059 and DAI RSB 42NG[hyphen]059
Revision 1. Later DAI issued Mandatory Service Bulletins DAI MSB
40NG[hyphen]048 Revision 1 and DAI MSB 42NG[hyphen]059 Revision 2
(referred to as `the applicable SB' in this AD) to provide
inspection instructions. DAI also improved the clamp material in a
redesign
    For the reasons described above, this AD requires repetitive
inspections of the auto pilot bridle cable clamps, and replacement
of clamps with redesigned clamps if cracks are found.

    You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9318.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH has issued Mandatory Service
Bulletin MSB 40NG-048/1, dated September 9, 2016, Work Instruction WI-
MSB 40NG-048, Revision 1, dated September 9, 2016, Mandatory Service
Bulletin MSB 42NG-059/2, dated September 9, 2016, and Work Instruction
WI-MSB 42NG-059, Revision 2, dated September 9, 2016. In paired
combinations, the mandatory service bulletins and work instructions
describe procedures for inspecting the autopilot bridle cable clamps
and replacing the clamps with redesigned clamps if cracks are found on
the applicable airplane models. This service information is reasonably
available because the interested parties have access to it through
their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
ADDRESSES section of this AD.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we
evaluated all information provided by the State of Design Authority and
determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or
develop on other products of the same type design.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because
cracked autopilot bridle cable clamp could cause detachment of the
clamps from the control system and result in reduced control.
Therefore, we determined that notice and opportunity for public comment
before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant

data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an
address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-
2016-9318; Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-031-AD'' at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 78 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the basic inspection requirement of this AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S.
operators to be $6,630, or $85 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on replacement
actions will take about 1 work-hour and require parts costing $41 per
autopilot bridle cable clamp. There are a total of 4 clamps per
airplane. This AD requires replacing 2 clamps at a time, for a cost of
$167 per product. We have no way of determining the number of products
that may need these actions.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2016-22-06 Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH: Amendment 39-18695;
Docket No. FAA-2016-9318; Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-031-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective November 16,
2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the following Diamond Aircraft Industries
GmbH model airplanes certificated in any category.
    (1) Model DA 40 NG: Serial numbers 40.N260 through 40.N314;
    (2) Model DA 42 NG: Serial numbers 42.N150 through 42.N223; and
    (3) Model DA 42 M-NG: Serial numbers 42.MN035 through 42.MN052.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 22: Autopilot.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) issued by the aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracked
autopilot bridle cable clamps, which could cause detachment of the
clamps from the control system and could result in reduced control.

(f) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Within the next 25 hours time-in-service (TIS) after
November 16, 2016 (the effective date of this AD) or within the next
3 months after November 16, 2016 (the effective date of this AD),
whichever occurs first, and repetitively thereafter at intervals not
to exceed 200 hours TIS, inspect each autopilot bridle cable clamp,
part numbers (P/Ns) D41-2213-10-53 and D41-2213-10-54. Do the
inspections following the INSTRUCTIONS section of Diamond Aircraft
Industries GmbH (DAI) Work Instruction WI-MSB 40NG-048, Revision 1,
dated September 9, 2016, as specified in the Accomplishments/
Instructions paragraph of DAI Mandatory Service Bulletin MSB 40NG-
048/1, dated September 9, 2016, and the INSTRUCTIONS section of DAI
Work Instruction WI-MSB 42NG-059, Revision 2, dated September 9,
2016, as specified in the Accomplishments/Instructions paragraph of
DAI Mandatory Service Bulletin MSB 42NG-059/2, dated September 9,
2016, as applicable.

    Note 1 to paragraph (f)(1) of this AD:  The European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2016-0190, dated September 26, 2016, and
the DAI service bulletins referenced in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD
allow the compliance time for the initial inspection of each
autopilot bridle cable clamp to be extended from within the 25 hours
time-in-service or within the next 3 months, whichever occurs first,
to 200 hours TIS or 12 months, whichever occurs first, as long as
the autopilot is deactivated. This AD does not allow for this
extension.

    (2) If a crack is found in either autopilot bridle cable clamp
during any inspection required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD,
before further flight, replace both autopilot bridle cable clamps
with improved design autopilot bridle cable clamps, P/Ns D41-2213-
10-53_01 (or higher) and P/N D41-2213-10-54_01 (or higher). Do the
replacements following the INSTRUCTIONS section of DAI Work
Instruction WI-MSB 40NG-048, Revision 1, dated September 9, 2016, as
specified in the Accomplishments/Instructions paragraph of DAI
Mandatory Service Bulletin MSB 40NG-048/1, dated September 9, 2016,
and the INSTRUCTIONS section of DAI Work Instruction WI-MSB 42NG-
059, Revision 2, dated September 9, 2016, as specified in the
Accomplishments/Instructions paragraph of DAI Mandatory Service
Bulletin MSB 42NG-

059/2, dated September 9, 2016, as applicable.
    (3) Installing improved design autopilot bridle cable clamps, P/
N D41-2213-10-53_01 (or higher) and P/N D41-2213-10-54_01 (or
higher) terminates the repetitive inspections required in paragraph
(f)(1) of this AD.
    (4) As of November 16, 2016 (the effective date of this AD), do
not install autopilot bridle cable clamps, P/Ns D41-2213-10-53 and
D41-2213-10-54.

(g) Credit for Actions Done Following Previous Service Information

    This AD allows credit for doing only the initial inspection
action required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD if done before
November 16, 2016 (the effective date of this AD), following DAI
Recommended Service Bulletin RSB 40NG-048, dated August 24, 2016,
and DAI Recommended Service Bulletin RSB 42NG-059, dated June 30,
2016, or DAI Recommended Service Bulletin RSB 42NG-059, Revision 1,
dated August 24, 2016, as applicable.

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane
to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal
inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO),
or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, a federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person
is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information
subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless
that collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control
Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is
2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is
estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per response, including the
time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this
burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to
the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn:
Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

(i) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI EASA AD No. 2016-0190, dated September 26, 2016,
DAI Recommended Service Bulletin RSB 40NG-048, dated August 24,
2016, DAI Recommended Service Bulletin RSB 42NG-059, dated June 30,
2016, and DAI Recommended Service Bulletin RSB 42NG-059, Revision 1,
dated August 24, 2016, for related information. You may examine the
MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9318.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Mandatory Service Bulletin
MSB 40NG-048/1, dated September 9, 2016.
    (ii) Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Work Instruction WI-MSB
40NG-048, Revision 1, dated September 9, 2016.
    (iii) Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Mandatory Service
Bulletin MSB 42NG-059/2, dated September 9, 2016.
    (iv) Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Work Instruction WI-MSB
42NG-059, Revision 2, dated September 9, 2016.
    (3) For Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH service information
identified in this AD, contact Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH,
N.A. Otto-Stra[szlig]e 5, A-2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria,
telephone: +43 2622 26700; fax: +43 2622 26780; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: http://www.diamondaircraft.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9318.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri on October 17, 2016.
Pat Mullen,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-25657 Filed 10-26-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 6)]
[Notices]
[Page 969-972]
[DOCID:fr09ja09-71]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59197; File No. SR-BSE-2008-52]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Amend BOX Rules Relating to Obvious Error Provisions To Address
Catastrophic Errors, Erroneous Quotes or Prints in the Underlying
Security, and Some Additional Modifications

January 5, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
) (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on December 24, 2008, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.) (``BSE'' or
the ``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 by BSE. The Exchange 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 the proposal effective upon filing with
the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter V, Section 20 (Obvious
Errors) of the Rules of the Boston Options Exchange Group, LLC )
(``BOX'') to address catastrophic errors ) (``Catastrophic Errors'') as
well as erroneous quotes or prints in the underlying security and some
additional modifications to this section. The text of the proposed rule
change is available from the principal office of the Exchange, at the
Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the Exchange's Internet
Web site at http://nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=Boston_Stock_
Exchange.

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 self-regulatory organization
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 self-regulatory organization
has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the
most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend Chapter V,
Section 20 of the BOX Rules (the ``Obvious Error Rule'') to address
certain extreme circumstances. In particular, the Exchange proposes to
add criteria for identifying ``Catastrophic Errors'' and making
adjustments when Catastrophic Errors occur, as well as a streamlined
procedure for reviewing actions taken in these extreme circumstances.
This proposed rule change also seeks to incorporate provisions within
the BOX Obvious Error Rule which will allow for the nullification or
adjustment of trades that are the result of either an erroneous quote
or print in the underlying security. In addition, the proposed rule
also amends the Supplementary Material to remove references to a $.05
offer and to provide that executions may be busted, if at least one
strike below (for calls) or above (for puts), rather than the three
strikes.
    The Exchange notes that, currently under the Obvious Error Rule,
trades that result from an Obvious Error may be adjusted or busted
according to objective standards. Under the rule, whether an Obvious
Error has occurred is determined by comparing the execution price to
the Theoretical Price of the option. The rule requires that
participants notify the Market Operations Center ) (``MOC'') within a
short time period following the execution of a trade (five minutes for
market makers and 20 minutes for non-market makers) if they believe the
trade qualifies as an Obvious Error. Trades that qualify for adjustment
are adjusted under the rule to a price that matches the Theoretical
Price plus or minus an adjustment value, which is $.15 if the
theoretical value is under $3 and $.30 if the theoretical value is at
or above $3. By adjusting trades above or below the Theoretical Price,
the rule assesses a ``penalty'' in that the adjustment price is not as
favorable as what the party making the error would have received had it
not made the error.
    In formulating the Obvious Error Rule, the Exchange has weighed
carefully the need to assure that one market participant is not
permitted to receive a wind-fall at the expense of another market
participant that made an Obvious Error, against the need to assure that
market participants are not simply being given an opportunity to
reconsider poor trading decisions. The Exchange states that, while it
believes that the Obvious Error Rule strikes the correct balance in
most situations, in some extreme situations, participants may not be
aware of errors that result in very large losses within the time
periods required under the rule. In this type of extreme situation, the
Exchange believes participants should be given more time to seek relief
so that there is a greater opportunity to mitigate very large losses
and reduce the corresponding large wind-falls. However, to maintain the
appropriate balance, the Exchange believes participants should only be
given more time when the execution price is much further away from the
Theoretical Price than is required for Obvious Errors, and that the
adjustment ``penalty'' should be much greater, so that relief is only
provided in extreme circumstances.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange does not believe the type of extreme situation
that is covered by the proposed rule would occur in the normal
course of trading. Rather, this type of situation could potentially
occur as a result of, for example, an error in a paticipant's
quotation system that causes a market maker to severly misprice an
option.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend the Obvious Error Rule
to address ``Catastrophic Errors.'' Under the proposed rule,
participants will have until 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time on the day
following the trade to notify the MOC of a potential Catastrophic
Error. For trades that take place in an expiring series on expiration
Friday, participants must notify the MOC of a potential Catastrophic
Error by 5 p.m. Eastern Time that same day. Once a participant has
notified the MOC of a Catastrophic Error within the required time
period,

the Market Regulation Center ) (``MRC'') will review the Catastrophic
Error claim.
    A Catastrophic Error would be deemed to have occurred when the
execution price of a transaction is higher or lower than the
Theoretical Price for the option by an amount equal to at least the
amount shown in the second column of the chart below (the ``Minimum
Amount''), and the adjustment would be made plus or minus the amount
shown in column three of the chart below (the ``Adjustment Value''). At
all price levels, the Minimum Amount and the Adjustment Value for
Catastrophic Errors would be significantly higher than for Obvious
Errors, which the Exchange believes, would limit the application of the
proposed rule to situations where the losses are very large.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Minimum     Adjustment
               Theoretical price                   amount       value
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below $2......................................           $1           $1
$2 to $5......................................            2            2
Above $5 to $10...............................            5            3
Above $10 to $50..............................           10            5
Above $50 to $100.............................           20            7
Above $100....................................           30           10
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following example demonstrates how the proposed Catastrophic
Error provisions would operate within the Obvious Error framework.
Assume a participant notifies the MOC within 2 minutes of a trade where
100 contracts of an option with a Theoretical Price of $9 were
purchased for $17, resulting in an $80,000 error.\6\ The trade would
qualify as an Obvious Error because the purchase price is more than
$.50 above the Theoretical Price and the participant notified the MOC
within the required time period. The Exchange would review the trade
and either bust it or adjust it to a purchase price of $9.30,\7\ which
reduces the cost of the error to $3,000.\8\ If, however, the
participant failed to identify the same error and notify the MOC until
four hours after the trade, it may not be reviewed under the current
Obvious Error Rule. Under the proposal, this trade would qualify as a
Catastrophic Error because the purchase price is more than $5 above the
Theoretical Price. Under the proposal, the MRC would review the trade
and adjust the purchase price to $12, which reduces the cost of the
error to $30,000.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ One hundred contracts equal 10,000 shares, and the purchase
price is $8 per share above the Theoretical Price. Therefore, the
purchaser paid $80,000 over the theoretical value.
    \7\ See Proposed Chapter V, Section 20(g)(ii) of the BOX Rules.
    \8\ 10,000 shares at $.30 per share over the theoretical value.
    \9\ 10,000 shares at $3.00 per share over the theoretical value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed longer time period is
appropriate to allow participants to discover, and seek relief from,
trading errors that result in extreme losses. At the same time, the
Exchange believes that the proposed Minimum Amounts required for a
trade to qualify as a Catastrophic Error, in combination with the large
Adjustment Values, assures that only those transactions where the price
of the execution results in very high losses will be eligible for
adjustment under the new provisions. While the Exchange believes it is
important to identify and resolve trading errors quickly, it also
believes it is important to the integrity of the marketplace to have
the authority to mitigate extreme losses resulting from errors. In this
respect, the Exchange believes that the above example illustrates how
market participants would continue to be encouraged to identify errors
quickly, as losses will be significantly lower if the erroneous trades
are busted or adjusted under the Obvious Error provisions of the rule.
    In consideration of the extreme nature of situations that will be
addressed under the proposed Catastrophic Error provisions, the
Exchange proposes a streamlined procedure for making determinations and
adjustments. Under the current rule for Obvious Errors, the MRC makes
determinations that can then be appealed to the Boston Options Exchange
Regulation (``BOXR'') Chief Regulatory Officer (``CRO''). For
Catastrophic Errors, the Exchange proposes to have a one-step process
where the MRC, with the approval of the CRO or an Options Official,\10\
who is not a participant, designated by the CRO (``CRO or designee'')
makes determinations and adjustments. If it is determined that a
Catastrophic Error has occurred, the CRO or its designee will instruct
the MRC to adjust the execution price of the transaction(s) according
to proposed subparagraph (g)(iii). All determinations by the CRO or its
designee shall constitute final Exchange action on the matter at issue.
The Exchange encourages participants to request reviews only in
appropriate situations, particularly given the objective criteria used
to determine whether a Catastrophic Error occurred and the considerable
amount of time participants are given under the proposal to assess
whether a trade falls within that criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See BOX Rules Chapter I, Section 1(43) which defines
``Options Official'' as an officer of BOX Regulation vested by the
BOX Regulation Board with certain authority to supervise option
trading on BOX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Exchange proposes to amend the Obvious Error Rule
to address an occurrence of an erroneous quote or print in the
underlying security. Participants on BOX base the value of their quotes
and orders off of the price of underlying security. The two provisions
which the Exchange proposes to add to the BOX Obvious Error Rule cover
instances where the information that the participants are using to
price options is erroneous, through no fault of their own. An erroneous
quote or print in an underlying security, which is disseminated by the
Primary Market \11\ for that security, means that participants are
receiving erroneous information which they then incorporate into
trading decisions. In these instances, participants have little if any
chance of pricing options accurately. In order to provide relief from
transactions that occur as a result of these erroneous quotes and/or
prints, the Exchange proposes the following provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See BOX Rules Chapter I, Section 1(50) which defines
``Primary Market'' as the principal market where the underlying
security is traded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chapter V, Section 20(d) Erroneous Print in Underlying
    An electronic trade resulting from an erroneous print disseminated
by the Primary Market which is later cancelled or corrected by that
Primary Market may be nullified. In order to be nullified, however, the
trade must be the result of an erroneous print that is higher or lower
than the average trade in the

underlying security during a two-minute period before and after the
erroneous print by an amount at least five times greater than the
average quote width for such underlying security during the same
period. For purposes of this paragraph, the average trade in the
underlying security shall be determined by adding the prices of each
trade during the four minute time period referenced above (excluding
the trade in question) and dividing by the number of trades during such
time period (excluding the trade in question). For purposes of this
paragraph, the average quote width shall be determined by adding the
quote widths of each separate quote during the four minute time period
referenced above (excluding the quote in question) and dividing by the
number of quotes during such time period (excluding the quote in
question).
Chapter V, Section 20(e) Erroneous Quote in Underlying
    Trades resulting from an erroneous quote in the underlying security
may be adjusted or nullified as set forth in Chapter V, Section 20(f).
An erroneous quote occurs when the underlying security has a width of
at least $1.00 and has a width at least five times greater than the
average quote width for such underlying security on the Primary Market
(as defined in BOX Rules Chapter I, Section 1(50)) during the time
period encompassing two minutes before and after the dissemination of
such quote. For purposes of this paragraph, the average quote width
shall be determined by adding the quote widths of each separate quote
during the four minute time period referenced above (excluding the
quote in question) and dividing by the number of quotes during such
time period (excluding the quote in question) and dividing by the
number of quotes during such time period (excluding the quote in
question).
    These proposed rule changes will provide participants on BOX with
the same opportunities for price adjustment or trade nullification that
are available on other options exchanges. The Exchange notes that these
provisions are similar in all respects to rules already approved for
use at The Chicago Board Options Exchange (``CBOE''),\12\ The American
Stock Exchange (``Amex''),\13\ and NYSE Arca.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See CBOE Rules 6.25(a)(4)-(5).
    \13\ See Amex Rules 936-ANTE(a)(4)-(5).
    \14\ See NYSE Arca Rules 6.87(a)(4)-(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the proposed rule also amends the Supplementary
Material to remove references to a $.05 offer. The Exchange also
proposes to provide that buyers of options with a zero bid may request
their execution be busted, if at least one strike below (for calls) or
above (for puts), in the same options class were quoted with a zero bid
at the time of execution rather than the three strikes, which is
currently in the rule. Removing the references to a $.05 offer will
allow errors resulting from trades in penny pilot issues be treated in
the same manner as non-penny classes. Moreover, these proposed changes
will provide participants on BOX with similar opportunities for price
adjustment or trade nullification that are available on other options
exchanges.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See e.g. CBOE Rules 6.25(a)(2); Amex Rules 936-ANTE(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,\16\ in general, and Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\17\ in particular, in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. Specifically, the proposal
will, under certain circumstances, provide participants with the
opportunity for a longer period within which to seek relief from errors
that result in large losses. The proposal is also appropriate given
that it provides for the adjustment or nullification of trades which
are executed at clearly erroneous prices due to no fault of the parties
to the trade. Finally, removing the references to a $.05 offer in the
Supplementary Material will allow errors resulting from trades in penny
pilot issues be treated in the same manner as non-penny classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 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 has neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change 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 \18\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
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.
BSE has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.
    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \20\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \21\ permits the Commission to
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. BSE requests that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay to immediately offer market
participants on BSE the same potential for relief that is available at
other options exchanges for certain obvious errors, catastrophic
errors, or erroneous quotes or prints in the underlying security. The
Exchange stated that the proposed changes are not novel and are
necessary to eliminate any confusion among members of multiple
exchanges regarding the handling and treatment of requests for review
of Catastrophic Errors and instances of erroneous quotes or prints in
the underlying security and for purposes of maintaining a fair and
orderly market. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day

operative delay \22\ is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. Given that the Exchange's proposed rule change is
substantially similar to the rules of other exchanges previously
approved by the Commission, the proposal does not appear to present any
novel regulatory issues. Therefore, the Commission designates the
proposal as operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \21\ Id.
    \22\ For 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BSE-2008-52 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BSE-2008-52. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BSE-2008-52 and should be
submitted on or before January 30, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-158 Filed 1-8-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P