[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 223 (Monday, November 19, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69391-69393]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27999]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 223 / Monday, November 19, 2012 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1164; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-075-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Airbus Model A310-204, -222, -304, -322, and -324 airplanes.
This proposed AD was prompted by the manufacturer re-classifying slat
extension eccentric bolts as principle structural elements (PSE) with
replacement due at or before newly calculated fatigue life limits. This
proposed AD would require replacing slat extension eccentric bolts, and
associated washers with new slat extension eccentric bolts and washers.
We are proposing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking, which could
result in the loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 3, 2013.

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, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Airbus SAS--EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61
93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2012-1164;
Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-075-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on 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 proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the aviation
authority for the Member States of the European Community, has issued
EASA Airworthiness Directive 2012-0042, dated April 10, 2012 (referred
to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    Slat extension eccentric bolts have been reclassified as
Principal Structural Elements (PSE). As a result, associated fatigue
lives will be published in the Airbus A310 Airworthiness Limitation
Section (ALS) Part 1 and bolts must be replaced at or before their
calculated fatigue lives.
    Failure to replace the bolts within the new fatigue life limits
constitutes an unsafe condition.
    For the reasons explained above, this [EASA] AD requires:

--For A310-300 aeroplanes, the replacement of slat extension
eccentric bolts, Part Number (P/N) A57844015200, with slat extension
eccentric bolts P/N A57844015204 at the slat 2 tracks 4 and 7 and
slat 3 track 8 positions on both Left Hand (LH) and Right Hand (RH)
wings, and
--For A310-300 and A310-200 aeroplanes that incorporate Airbus
modification 04809, the replacement of slat extension eccentric
bolts, P/N A57843624200 and associated washers P/N A57844016200,
with slat extension eccentric bolts P/N A57843624202 and washers P/N
A57844391200 at the slat 2 track 5 position, on both LH and RH
wings.

The unsafe condition is fatigue cracking, which could result in the
loss of structural integrity of the airplane. You may obtain further
information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-57-2100, Revision
01, dated February 3, 2012. The actions described in this service
information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in
the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed 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 the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent

information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to
exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 1 product of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it
would take about 9 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $25,250 per product. Where
the service information lists required parts costs that are covered
under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these
parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties,
some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to
be $26,015, or $26,015 per product.

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 proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 this proposed
regulation:
    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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    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]

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

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2012-1164; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-
075-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 3, 2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A310-204, -222, -304, -322, and
-324 airplanes, certificated in any category, having received in
production Airbus modification 04809 without Airbus modification
06243 or 13596.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by the manufacturer re-classifying slat
extension eccentric bolts as principle structural elements (PSE)
with replacement due at or before newly calculated fatigue life
limits. We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking, which
could result in the loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD
performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions
have already been done.

(g) Compliance Times

    At the applicable time specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2),
and (g)(3) of this AD: Do the replacements specified in paragraphs
(h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, as applicable. For the purposes of
this AD, to establish the average flight time (AFT), take the
accumulated flight time (counted from the take-off up to the
landing) and divide it by the number of accumulated flight cycles.
This gives the AFT per flight cycle.
    (1) For Model A310-304, -322, and -324 airplanes operated with
an AFT of less than 4 hours: Before the accumulation of 66,000 total
flight hours or 40,000 total flight cycles, whichever occurs first.
    (2) For Model A310-304, -322, and -324 airplanes operated with
an AFT of 4 hours or more: Before the accumulation of 66,000 total
flight hours or 31,400 total flight cycles, whichever occurs first.
    (3) For Model A310-204 and -222 airplanes with Airbus
modification 04809: Before the accumulation of 71,800 total flight
hours or 35,900 total flight cycles, whichever occurs first.

(h) Replacement of Slat Extension Eccentric Bolt and Hardware on Both
Wings

    (1) For Model A310-304, -322, and -324 airplanes: Replace the
slat extension eccentric bolts, part number (P/N) A57844015200, at
the slat 2 tracks 4 and 7 and slat 3 track 8 positions with new slat
extension bolts, P/N A57844015204, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A310-57-2100, Revision 01, dated February 3, 2012.
    (2) For Model A310-304, -322, and -324 airplanes, and Model
A310-204 and -222 airplanes that have incorporated Airbus
modification 04809: Replace the slat extension eccentric bolts, P/N
A57843624200, at the slat 2 track 5 position with new slat extension
bolts, P/N A57843624202; and replace the associated washers of
eccentric bolts, P/N A57844016200, at slat 2 track 5 position with
washers, P/N A57844391200; in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-57-2100,
Revision 01, dated February 3, 2012.

(i) Parts Installation Prohibition

    After the modification of the airplane with the replacement of
slat extension eccentric bolts and associated hardware required by
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, no person may install any slat
extension eccentric bolt, P/N A57844015200 or P/N A57843624200, with
associated washer P/N A57844016200, on that airplane.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as

appropriate. If sending information directly to the International
Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone (425) 227-
2125; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD.
    (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.

(k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness
Directive 2012-0042, dated April 10, 2012; and Airbus Mandatory
Service Bulletin A310-57-2100, Revision 01, dated February 3, 2012;
for related information.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS-EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on
the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 9, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-27999 Filed 11-16-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 202 (Friday, October 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 72524]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23165]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2023-0001]

Notice of Adjustment of Disaster Grant Amounts

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: FEMA gives notice of an adjustment to the threshold for Small
Project subgrants made to State, Tribal, and local governments and
private nonprofit facilities for disasters declared on or after October
1, 2023.

DATES: This adjustment applies to major disasters and emergencies
declared on or after October 1, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tod Wells, Recovery Directorate,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207, as amended by the Sandy
Recovery Improvement Act, Public Law 113-2, provides that FEMA will
annually adjust the threshold for assistance provided under section
422, Simplified Procedures, relating to the Public Assistance program,
to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers
published by the Department of Labor.
    FEMA gives notice that $1,037,000 is the threshold for any Small
Project subgrant made to State, Tribal, and local governments or to the
owner or operator of an eligible private nonprofit facility under
section 422 of the Stafford Act for all major disasters or emergencies
declared on or after October 1, 2023.
    FEMA bases the adjustment on an increase in the Consumer Price
Index for All Urban Consumers of 3.7 percent for the 12-month period
that ended in August 2023. This is based on information released by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics at the U.S. Department of Labor on September
13, 2023.

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.036, Disaster
Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters).

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-23165 Filed 10-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 87 (Tuesday, May 6, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25961-25965]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10291]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72055; File No. SR-Phlx-2014-27]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Add New Paragraphs (h) and (i) to
Rule 3312, entitled ``Clearly Erroneous Transactions''

April 30, 2014.
    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 April 17, 2014, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' 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 prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to add new paragraphs (h) and (i) to Rule
3312, entitled ``Clearly Erroneous Transactions.''
    The text of the proposed rule change is available from Phlx's Web
site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com, at Phlx's principal
office, 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
    The purpose of this filing is to add new paragraph (h) to Rule 3312
to

provide the Exchange with authority to nullify transactions that were
effected based on the same fundamentally incorrect or grossly
misinterpreted issuance information even if such transactions occur
over a period of several days, as further described below. An example
of fundamentally incorrect and grossly misinterpreted issuance
information that led to a severe valuation error is included below for
illustrative purposes.
    The Exchange also proposes to add new paragraph (i) to Rule 3312 to
make clear that in the event of any disruption or malfunction in the
operation of the electronic communications and trading facilities of
the Exchange, another market center or responsible single plan
processor in connection with the transmittal or receipt of a regulatory
trading halt, suspension or pause (hereafter generally referred to as a
``trading halt'' for ease of reference), the Exchange will nullify any
transaction that occurs after the primary listing market for a security
declares a trading halt with respect to such security. In the event a
trading halt is declared, then prematurely lifted in error, and then
re-instituted, proposed paragraph (i) would also result in
nullification of any transactions that occur before the official, final
end of the trading halt according to the primary listing market.
    The Exchange also proposes a change to certain cross-references in
Rule 3312, due to the addition of paragraphs (h) and (i). Specifically,
the Exchange proposes to update cross-references in existing paragraph
(g) of Rule 3312 in order to make clear that the provisions of
paragraph (g) do not alter the application of other provisions of Rule
3312, including new paragraphs (h) and (i).
Background
    On September 10, 2010, the Commission approved, on a pilot basis,
changes to the clearly erroneous rules of the national securities
exchanges to provide for uniform treatment: (1) Of clearly erroneous
execution reviews in multi-stock events involving twenty or more
securities; and (2) in the event transactions occur that result in the
issuance of an individual stock trading pause by the primary listing
market and subsequent transactions that occur before the trading pause
is in effect on the Exchange.\3\ The national securities exchanges
adopted additional changes to their clearly erroneous rules that
reduced the ability of the national securities exchanges to deviate
from the objective standards set forth in their respective clearly
erroneous rules.\4\ In connection with its resumption of trading of NMS
Stocks through the NASDAQ OMX PSX system, the Exchange amended Rule
3312 to conform it to the newly-adopted changes to the national
securities exchanges' clearly erroneous rules, so that it could
participate in the pilot program.\5\ In 2013, the Exchange adopted a
provision designed to address the operation of the Plan to Address
Extraordinary Market Volatility Pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS
under the Act (the ``Limit Up-Limit Down Plan'' or the ``Plan'').\6\
The Exchange removed the specific provisions related to individual
stock trading pauses and extended to April 8, 2014 the pilot program
applicable to certain provisions of Rule 3312.\7\ Most recently, the
Exchange extended the effectiveness of the pilot program under Rule
3312 to coincide with the pilot period for the Plan, including any
extensions to the pilot period for the Plan.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62886 (Sept. 10, 2010),
75 FR 56613 (Sept. 16, 2010).
    \4\ Id.
    \5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63023 (Sept. 30, 2010),
75 FR 61802 (Oct. 6, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-125).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68820 (Feb. 1,
2013), 78 FR 9436 (Feb. 8, 2013) (SR-Phlx-2013-12); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31, 2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6,
2012) (the ``Limit Up-Limit Down Release''); see also Exchange Rule
3312(g).
    \7\ Paragraphs (a)(2)(C), (b), (c)(1) and (g) of Rule 3312 are
currently subject to a pilot program. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 70541 (Sept. 27, 2013), 78 FR 61431 (Oct. 3, 2013) (SR-
Phlx-2013-97).
    \8\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71783 (Mar. 24, 2014),
79 FR 17617 (Mar. 28, 2014) (SR-Phlx-2014-18).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed, similar to other provisions added in recent years, as
described above, both paragraph (h) and paragraph (i) would be subject
to the pilot period, and thus, will coincide with the pilot period for
the Plan, including any extensions to the pilot period for the Plan.
Executions Based on Incorrect or Grossly Misinterpreted Issuance
Information
    The Exchange proposes to adopt a new provision, paragraph (h), to
Rule 3312, which would provide that a series of transactions in a
particular security on one or more trading days may be viewed as one
event if all such transactions were effected based on the same
fundamentally incorrect or grossly misinterpreted issuance information
(e.g., with respect to a stock split or corporate dividend) resulting
in a severe valuation error for all such transactions (the ``Event'').
    As proposed, an Officer of the Exchange or senior level employee
designee, acting on his or her own motion, would be required to take
action to declare all transactions that occurred during the Event null
and void not later than the start of trading on the day following the
last transaction in the Event. If trading in the security is halted
before the valuation error is corrected, the Officer of the Exchange or
senior level employee designee would be required to take action to
declare all transactions that occurred during the Event null and void
prior to the resumption of trading. The Exchange proposes to make clear
that no action can be taken pursuant to proposed paragraph (h) with
respect to any transactions that have reached settlement date for the
security or that result from an initial public offering of a security.
The Exchange believes that declaring a trade null and void after
settlement date would be complex to administer and unfair to the
affected parties. The Exchange also believes that excluding IPOs from
the proposed rule will ensure that transactions in a new security for
which there is no benchmark information are not called into question,
as it is the IPO process itself, including the extensive public
disclosure associated with IPOs, that is intended to drive price
formation.
    Further, the Exchange proposes that to the extent transactions
related to an Event occur on one or more other market centers, the
Exchange will promptly coordinate with such other market center(s) to
ensure consistent treatment of the transactions related to the Event,
if practicable. The Exchange also proposes to state in the Rule that
any action taken in connection with paragraph (h) will be taken without
regard to the Numerical Guidelines set forth in paragraph (a)(2)(C)(i)
of Rule 3312. In particular, the Exchange believes that there could be
scenarios where there are erroneous transactions related to an Event
that do not meet applicable Numerical Guidelines but that are, upon
review, clearly erroneous. One example of a situation that could occur
is a corporate action, such as a stock split, that results in the
dissemination of fundamentally incorrect or grossly misinterpreted
issuance information and leads to erroneous transactions at a price
that is close to the price at which the security was previously
trading. Even if such trading is consistent with prior trading activity
for the security, and thus would not meet applicable Numerical
Guidelines, the Exchange would have the authority to nullify such

transactions if they were affected based on the same fundamentally
incorrect or grossly misinterpreted issuance information and there was
a severe valuation error as a result (i.e., although the security
should be trading at a price further away from its previous range, due
to fundamentally incorrect or grossly misinterpreted issuance
information with respect to the corporate action the security continues
to trade at a price that does not meet applicable Numerical
Guidelines).
    The Exchange also proposes to include a provision, as it does in
many other sub-paragraphs of Rule 3312, stating that each Member
involved in a transaction subject to proposed paragraph (h) shall be
notified as soon as practicable by the Exchange, and that the party
aggrieved by the action may appeal such action in accordance with
Exchange Rule 3312(c).
    In particular, the Exchange believes it is necessary to have
authority to nullify trades that occur in an event similar to an event
involving an exchange offer (``Exchange Offer'') made by U.S. Bancorp
on the New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') in 2010 in which there were a
series of executions based on incorrect or grossly misinterpreted
issuance information. As a result of such information, the securities
traded at severely dislocated prices. At the time, the NYSE filed an
emergency rule filing in order to respond to that event.\9\ With the
filing the NYSE interpreted the rule applicable to clearly erroneous
executions as permitting the NYSE to nullify all trades resulting after
the Exchange Offer at severely dislocated prices.\10\ The Exchange
believes it is important to have in place a rule to break such trades
if an event like the U.S. Bancorp event occurs again in the future. The
U.S. Bancorp event is described in further detail below and is intended
to be illustrative of the manner in which the Exchange proposes to
utilize proposed paragraph (h), if necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62609 (July 30, 2010),
75 FR 47327 (Aug. 5, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-55).
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In May 2010, U.S. Bancorp commenced an offer to exchange up to
1,250,000 Depositary Shares, each representing a 1/100 interest in a
share of Series A Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, $100,000
liquidation preference per share (the ``Depositary Shares'') for any
and all of the 1,250,000 outstanding 6.189% Fixed-to-Floating Rate
Normal ITS issued by U.S. Bancorp Capital IX, each with a liquidation
amount of $1,000 (the ``Normal ITS''). The Depositary Shares were
approved for listing on the NYSE under the symbol USB PRA. On June 11,
2010, the NYSE opened the shares on a quote, but trading did not
commence until June 16, 2010 at prices in the range of $79.00 per
share. There were additional executions on the NYSE in that price range
on June 17 and 18, 2010. On June 18, 2010, NYSE staff learned that the
prices at which trades had executed were not consistent with the value
of the security, which was closer to an $800 price. Upon learning of
the pricing disparity, NYSE immediately halted trading in the
Depositary Shares on all markets and alerted U.S. Bancorp and other
exchanges that traded the Depositary Shares of the pricing discrepancy.
    In order to address the situation, the NYSE filed a proposal to
interpret its existing clearly erroneous execution rule such that the
trading in Depositary Shares from June 16 to June 18 constituted a
single event because that trading was based on incorrect or grossly
misinterpreted issuance information that resulted in severe price
dislocation (the ``U.S. Bancorp Event'').\11\ Because the Depositary
Shares were halted before the price of the Depositary Shares ceased to
be dislocated, and remained halted, the NYSE was able to review trading
in Depositary Shares and declare null and void all trading in the U.S.
Bancorp Event before the security resumed trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rather than filing a proposal in response to a similar event
happening again, the Exchange proposes to add paragraph (h) in order to
nullify transactions consistent with the description of the proposed
Rule above.
Executions After a Trading Halt Has Been Declared
    The Exchange proposes to add new paragraph (i) to Rule 3312 to make
clear that in the event of any disruption or malfunction in the
operation of the electronic communications and trading facilities of
the Exchange, another market center or responsible single plan
processor in connection with the transmittal or receipt of a trading
halt, the Exchange will nullify any transaction that occurs after the
primary listing market for a security declares a trading halt and
before such trading halt with respect to such security has officially
ended according to the primary listing market. In addition, proposed
paragraph (i) will make clear that in the event a trading halt is
declared, then prematurely lifted in error and then re-instituted, the
Exchange will nullify transactions that occur before the official,
final end of the trading halt according to the primary listing market.
    As with other provisions in Rule 3312, including proposed paragraph
(h) as discussed above, the authority to nullify transactions pursuant
to paragraph (i) would be vested in an officer of the Exchange or other
senior level employee designee, acting on his or her own motion. Any
action taken in connection with paragraph (i) would be taken in a
timely fashion, generally within thirty (30) minutes of the detection
of the erroneous transaction and in no circumstances later than the
start of Regular Market Session \12\ on the trading day following the
date of execution(s) under review. The Exchange also proposes to
specify that any action taken in connection with proposed paragraph (i)
will be taken without regard to the Numerical Guidelines set forth in
paragraph (a)(2)(C)(i) of Rule 3312. The Exchange believes it is
appropriate to act to nullify transactions pursuant to proposed
paragraph (i) without regard to applicable Numerical Guidelines because
in the situations covered by paragraph (i), such transactions should
not have occurred in the first instance, and thus, their nullification
does not put parties in any different position than they should have
been. The Exchange also believes that the certainty that the proposed
rule provides is critical in situations involving trading halts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Regular Market Session is defined in Exchange Rule
3100(b)(4)(D) as the trading session from 9:30 a.m. until 4:00 p.m.
or 4:15 p.m.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As it has proposed for paragraph (h), as described above, the
Exchange also proposes to include a provision stating that each Member
involved in a transaction subject to proposed paragraph (i) shall be
notified as soon as practicable by the Exchange, and that the party
aggrieved by the action may appeal such action in accordance with
Exchange Rule 3312(c).
    The Exchange notes that trading in a security is typically halted
immediately on the Exchange when the primary listing market issues a
trading halt in such security. However, in certain circumstances, due
to a technical issue related to the transmission or receipt of the
electronic message instituting such trading halt or due to other
extraordinary circumstances, executions can occur on the Exchange
following the declaration of such a trading halt. Similarly, although
rare, the Exchange has witnessed scenarios where due to extraordinary
circumstances a trading

halt is declared, then prematurely lifted in error and then re-
instituted. It is these types of extraordinary circumstances that the
Exchange believes require certainty, and thus, the Exchange believes it
necessary to make clear that in such a circumstance any transactions
after a trading halt has been declared will be nullified. In the event
that a trading halt is declared as of a future time (i.e., if the
primary listing exchange declares a trading halt as of a specific,
future time in order to ensure coordination amongst market
participants), the Exchange would only nullify transactions occurring
after the time the trading halt was supposed to be in place until the
official end of the trading halt according to the primary listing
market.
    The Exchange also notes that it currently has authority pursuant to
paragraph (b)(1) of Rule 3312 to review and nullify transactions that
arise during a disruption or malfunction in the operation of any
electronic communications and trading facilities of the Exchange.
Further, paragraph (b)(1) of Rule 3312 gives the Exchange authority to
use a lower numerical guideline than is set forth in paragraph
(a)(2)(C)(i) of Rule 3312 when necessary to maintain a fair and orderly
market and to protect investors and the public interest. Thus, while
the Exchange believes that paragraph (b)(1) does give the Exchange the
authority to nullify transactions occurring when there is an Exchange
technical issue related to the transmission or receipt of the
electronic message instituting a trading halt or with respect to a
technical issue related to a prematurely lifted trading halt, the
Exchange believes that proposed paragraph (i) will provide appropriate
authority for the Exchange to nullify all such transactions whether or
not the systems problem occurs on the Exchange with respect to trading
halts and explicit clarity for market participants that such
transactions will be nullified. The Exchange believes that such
authority is appropriate because when relied upon the Exchange will be
cancelling trades that should not have occurred in the first instance.
Finally, the Exchange believes that such authority is appropriate
because a trading halt declared by the primary listing market is
indicative of an issue with respect to the applicable security or a
larger set of securities.
 2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\13\ In particular,
the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\14\ because
it would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to adopt a provision
granting the Exchange authority to nullify trades that occur if an
Event similar to the U.S. Bancorp Event occurs again. The Exchange
believes that this provision will allow the Exchange to act in the
event of such a severe valuation error, that such action would promote
just and equitable principles of trade and that the proposal is
therefore consistent with the Act. Similarly, the Exchange believes
that adding a provision allowing the Exchange to nullify transactions
that occur when a trading halt is declared, then prematurely lifted in
error and then reinstituted, and providing that in the event of any
disruption or malfunction in the operation of the electronic
communications and trading facilities of the Exchange, another market
center or responsible single plan processor in connection with the
transmittal or receipt of a trading halt the Exchange will nullify
trades occurring after a trading halt has been declared by the primary
listing market for the security will help to avoid confusion amongst
market participants, which is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest and therefore consistent with the
Act. The Exchange further believes that the proposal is appropriate and
consistent with the Act because when relied upon the Exchange will be
cancelling trades that should not have occurred in the first instance.
The Exchange also believes that the proposal is appropriate because a
trading halt declared by the primary listing market is indicative of an
issue with respect to the applicable security or a larger set of
securities.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to update cross-references
in existing paragraph (g) of Rule 3312 to include new paragraphs (h)
and (i) is consistent with the Act because, as is the case with respect
to the current rule, this change makes clear that the provisions of
paragraph (g) do not alter the application of other provisions of Rule
3312.
    The Exchange believes that the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority (``FINRA'') and other national securities exchanges are also
filing similar proposals to add provisions similar to the provisions
proposed by the Exchange above. Therefore, the proposal promotes just
and equitable principles of trade in that it promotes transparency and
uniformity across markets concerning treatment of transactions as
clearly erroneous. The proposed rule change would also help to assure
consistent results in handling erroneous trades across the U.S.
markets, thus furthering fair and orderly markets, the protection of
investors and the public interest.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change
implicates any competitive issues. To the contrary, as noted above, the
Exchange believes FINRA and other national securities exchanges are
also filing similar proposals, and thus, that the proposal will help to
ensure consistency across market centers.

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 not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any written comments from members or other interested parties.

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

    Within 45 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 the Exchange consents, the Commission shall: (a) By order approve
or disapprove 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 email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2014-27 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2014-27. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email 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 Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 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-Phlx-2014-27 and should be
submitted on or before May 27, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-10291 Filed 5-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P