[Federal Register: October 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 190)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 56009-56010]
[DOCID:fr02oc07-1]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 95

[Docket No. 30573; Amdt. No. 470]

IFR Altitudes; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts miscellaneous amendments to the required
IFR (instrument flight rules) altitudes and changeover points for
certain Federal airways, jet routes, or direct routes for which a
minimum or maximum en route authorized IFR altitude is prescribed. This
regulatory action is needed because of changes occurring in the
National Airspace System. These changes are designed to provide for the
safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace under instrument
conditions in the affected areas.

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, October 25, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald P. Pate, Flight Procedure
Standards Branch (AMCAFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs
Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration,
Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This amendment to part 95 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 95) amends, suspends, or revokes IFR
altitudes governing the operation of all aircraft in flight over a
specified route or any portion of that route, as well as the changeover
points (COPs) for Federal airways, jet routes, or direct routes as
prescribed in part 95.

The Rule

    The specified IFR altitudes, when used in conjunction with the
prescribed changeover points for those routes, ensure navigation aid
coverage that is adequate for safe flight operations and free of
frequency interference. The reasons and circumstances that create the
need for this amendment involve matters of flight safety and
operational efficiency in the National Airspace System, are related to
published aeronautical charts that are essential to the user, and
provide for the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace. In
addition, those various reasons or circumstances require making this
amendment effective before the next scheduled charting and publication
date of the flight information to assure its timely availability to the
user. The effective date of this amendment reflects those
considerations. In view of the close and immediate relationship between
these regulatory changes and safety in air commerce, I find that notice
and public procedure before adopting this amendment are impracticable
and contrary to the public interest and that good cause exists for
making the amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 95

    Airspace, Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 24, 2007.
James J. Ballough,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, part 95 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part
95) is amended as follows effective at 0901 UTC, October 25, 2007.
0
1. The authority citation for part 95 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44719, 44721.

PART 95--[AMENDED]

0
2. Part 95 is amended to read as follows:

Revisions to IFR Altitudes & Changeover Points Amendment 470 Effective
Date October 25, 2007

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     From                                         To                        MEA          MAA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Sec.   95.4000 High Altitude RNAV Routes
                            Sec.   95.4024 RNAV Route Q24 Is Amended to Read in Part
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAKE CHARLES, LA VORTAC.......................  PAYTN, AL FIX.........................  *2        45000
                                                                                0000
    *18000--GPS MEA
    DME/DME/IRU MEA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Sec.   95.4035 RNAV Route Q35 Is Added to Read
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KIMBERLY, OR VORTAC...........................  CORKR, AZ FIX.........................       *29000        45000

    *DME/DME/IRU MEA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORKR, AZ FIX.................................  DRAKE, AZ VORTAC......................       *22000        45000
    *DME/DME/IRU MEA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

               From                           To                 MEA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Sec.   95.6001 Victor Routes--U.S.
    Sec.   95.6012 VOR Federal Airway V12 Is Amended to Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAPOLEON, MO VORTAC..............  FRANC, MO FIX...........         3000
FRANC, MO FIX....................  COLUMBIA, MO VOR/DME....         2600
COLUMBIA, MO VOR/DME.............  STITH, MO FIX...........        *2600
    *2100--MOCA
STITH, MO FIX....................  FORISTELL, MO VORTAC....         2600
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6258 VOR Federal Airway V258 Is Amended to Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BECKLEY, WV VORTAC...............  ZOOMS, WV FIX...........       *10000
    *6200--MOCA
ZOOMS, WV FIX....................  ROANOKE, VA VORTAC......         6300
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6316 VOR Federal Airway V316 Is Amended to Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IRONWOOD, MI VORTAC..............  SAWYER, MI VOR/DME......        *6000
    *3600--MOCA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sec.   95.6519 VOR Federal Airway V519 Is Amended to Read in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLUEFIELD, WV VORTAC.............  BECKLEY, WV VORTAC......        *9000
    *6300--MOCA
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E7-19238 Filed 10-1-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 244 (Tuesday, December 21, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80110-80111]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32010]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0166; Notice 1]

Panda Power LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

    Panda Power LLC (Panda Power),\1\ has determined that High
Intensity Discharge (HID) lighting kits \2\ that it imported and sold
during 2007, 2008 and 2009 failed to meet the requirements of paragraph
S7.7 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps,
Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. Panda Power has filed an
appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports, dated February 10, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Panda Power, LLC (Panda Power) is organized under the laws
of the State of Arizona and is the importer of the subject
nonconforming replacement equipment. Panda Power sold the
nonconforming replacement equipment while doing business under the
name Mobile HID.
    \2\ Panda Power's high-intensity lighting (HID kits each
contained 2 lamps, 2 lamp ballasts and a wiring harness with relay
and fuse).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule
at 49 CFR part 556), Panda Power has petitioned for an exemption from
the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on
the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety.
    This notice of receipt of Panda Power's petition is published under
49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
    Panda Power estimates that approximately 1,851 headlamp kits that
it sold during 2007, 2008 and 2009 are affected. All of the affected
kits were manufactured by Guangzhou Kingwoodcar Company, LTD, Guangzhou
City, China.
    Paragraph S7.7 of FMVSS No. 108 requires:

    S7.7 Replaceable light sources. Each replaceable light source
shall be designed to conform to the dimensions and electrical
specifications furnished with respect to it pursuant to part 564 of
this chapter, and shall conform to the following requirements:
    (a) If other than an HB Type, the light source shall be marked
with the bulb marking designation specified for it in compliance
with Appendix A or Appendix B of part 564 of this chapter. The base
of each HB Type shall be marked with its HB Type designation. Each
replaceable light source shall also be marked with the symbol DOT
and with a name or trademark in accordance with paragraph S7.2.
    (b) The measurement of maximum power and luminous flux that is
submitted in compliance with Appendix A or Appendix B of part 564 of
this chapter shall be made in accordance with this paragraph. The
filament or discharge arc shall be seasoned before measurement of
either. Measurement shall be made with the direct current test
voltage regulated within one quarter of one percent. The test
voltage shall be 12.8v. The measurement of luminous flux shall be in
accordance with the Illuminating Engineering Society of North
America, LM-45, IES Approved Method for Electrical and Photometric
Measurements of General Service Incandescent Filament Lamps (April
1980); shall be made with the black cap installed on Type HB1, Type
HB2, Type HB4, and Type HB5, and on any other replaceable light
source so designed; and shall be made with the electrical conductor
and light source base shrouded with an opaque white cover, except
for the portion normally located within the interior of the lamp
housing. The measurement of luminous flux for the Types HB3 and HB4
shall be made with the base covered with a white cover as shown in
the drawings for Types HB3 and HB4 filed in Docket No. NHTSA 98-
3397. (The white cover is used to eliminate the likelihood of
incorrect lumen measurement that will occur should the reflectance
of the light source base and electrical connector be low).
    (c) The capsule, lead wires and/or terminals, and seal on each
Type HB1, Type HB3, Type HB4, and Type HB5 light source, and on any
other replaceable light source which uses a seal, shall be installed
in a pressure chamber as shown in Figure 25 so as to provide an
airtight seal. The diameter of the aperture in Figure 25 on a
replaceable light source (other than an HB Type) shall be that
dimension furnished for such light source in compliance with
Appendix A or Appendix B of part 564 of this chapter. An airtight
seal exists when no air bubbles appear on the low pressure
(connector) side after the light source has been immersed in water
for one minute while inserted in a cylindrical aperture specified
for the light source, and subjected to an air pressure of 70kPa (10
P.S.I.G.) on the glass capsule side.
    (d) The measurement of maximum power and luminous flux that is
submitted in compliance with section VII of Appendix A of part 564
of this chapter, or section IV of Appendix B of part 564 of this
chapter, shall be made with the direct current test voltage
regulated within one quarter of one percent. The test voltage shall
be 12.8v. The measurement of luminous flux shall be in accordance
with the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, LM 45;
IES Approved Method for Electrical and Photometric Measurements of
General Service Incandescent Filament Lamps (April 1980). The
filament of a replaceable light source shall be seasoned before such
measurement. The white covers are used to eliminate the likelihood
of incorrect lumens measurement that will occur should the
reflectance of the light source base and electrical connector be
low.
    (1) For a light source with a resistive element type filament,
seasoning of the light

source shall be made in accordance with section 2.9 of SAE Standard
J1383 APR85 Performance Requirements for Motor Vehicle Headlamps.
The measurement of luminous flux shall be made with the black cap
installed on Type HB1, Type HB2, Type HB4, and Type HB5 light
sources, and on any other replaceable light source so designed, and
shall be made with the electrical conductor and light source base
shrouded with an opaque white colored cover, except for the portion
normally located within the interior of the lamp housing. The
measurement of luminous flux for Type HB3 and Type HB4 shall be made
with the base covered with the white cover shown in the drawings for
Types HB3 and HB4 filed in Docket No. NHTSA 98-3397.
    (2) For a light source using excited gas mixtures as a filament
or discharge arc, seasoning of the light source system, including
any ballast required for its operation, shall be made in accordance
with section 4.0 of SAE Recommended Practice J2009 FEB93 Discharge
Forward Lighting Systems. With the test voltage applied to the
ballast input terminals, the measurement of luminous flux shall be
made with the black cap installed, if so designed, and shall be made
with an opaque white colored cover, except for the portion normally
located within the interior of the lamp housing.
    (e) If a ballast is required for operation, each ballast shall
bear the following permanent markings:
    (1) Name or logo of ballast manufacturer;
    (2) Ballast part number or unique identification;
    (3) Part number or other unique identification of the light
source for which the ballast is designed;
    (4) Rated laboratory life of the light source/ballast
combination, if the information for the light source has been filed
in Appendix B of part 564 of this chapter;
    (5) A warning that ballast output voltage presents the potential
for severe electrical shock that could lead to permanent injury or
death;
    (6) Ballast output power in watts and output voltage in rms
volts AC or DC; and
    (7) The symbol ``DOT''.
    (f) For light sources that use excited gas mixtures as a
filament or discharge arc, the ``rated laboratory life'' shall be
determined in accordance with sections 4.3 and 4.9 of SAE
Recommended Practice J2009 FEB93 Forward Discharge Lighting Systems.
    (g) After the force deflection test conducted in accordance with
S9, the permanent deflection of the glass envelope shall not exceed
0.13 mm in the direction of the applied force.

    Panda Power did not describe the noncompliances in detail, instead
it deferred to the agency's concern that the subject HID headlamp kits
may not comply with one or more of the regulations enforced by the
agency. This concern was described as an apparent noncompliance in a
letter sent to Panda Power dated September 2, 2009. The letter was sent
to Panda Power as part of a National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance Office
Activity.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Office Activity Number: OA-108-090606G.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the petition Panda Power argues that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons: (1)
The kits were originally intended for sale to the agricultural
community to be placed on tractors and combines, for off-road vehicles,
and for exhibition purposes; (2) the HID bulbs that were sold with the
kits in 2007 and 2008 are likely burned out by now and no longer
functioning; and (3) Panda Power no longer sells the headlamp kits.
    Supported by the above stated reasons, Panda Power believes that
the described FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety, and that its petition, to exempt it from providing
recall notification of noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and
remedying the recall noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120,
should be granted.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance.
    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and
notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted by
any of the following methods:
    a. By mail addressed to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
    b. By hand delivery to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Section is open on
weekdays from 10 am to 5 pm except Federal holidays.
    c. Electronically: by logging onto the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) Web site at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the
online instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be faxed
to 1-202-493-2251.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that your comments were received, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that
all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
    Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the
address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by following the online
instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.

DATES: Comment closing date: January 20, 2011.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: December 15, 2010.
Claude H. Harris,
Acting Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2010-32010 Filed 12-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: October 6, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 193)]
[Notices]
[Page 61802-61806]
[DOCID:fr06oc10-151]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63023; File No. SR-Phlx-2010-125]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Regarding
Clearly Erroneous Transactions

September 30, 2010.
    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 September 22, 2010, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``PHLX'' 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 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 amend PHLX Rule 3312, governing clearly
erroneous executions on the NASDAQ OMX PSX system (``PSX''). The text
of the proposed rule change is available from the Exchange's Web site
at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com, at the Exchange's principal
office, at the Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov, 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. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item III below, and is set forth in Sections A, B, and C below.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing modifications to its Rule 3312, entitled
Clearly Erroneous Transactions. Rule 3312 was recently approved by the
Commission in connection with a proposal to resume trading of NMS
stocks through the Exchange's PSX system.\3\ The proposed changes are
designed to conform Rule 3312 to changes that were recently approved to
the corresponding rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market (the ``NASDAQ
Exchange'') and NASDAQ OMX BX (``BX''), and other exchanges.\4\ First,
the Exchange proposes replacing existing paragraph (a)(2)(C)(ii) of
Rule 3312, entitled ``Unusual Circumstances and Joint Market Rulings''
with a new paragraph, entitled ``Multi-Stock Events Involving Twenty or
More Securities.'' Second, the Exchange is replacing existing paragraph
(a)(2)(C)(iv) of Rule 3312, entitled ``Numerical Guidelines Applicable
to Volatile Market Opens'' with a new paragraph, entitled ``Individual
Stock Trading Pauses.'' Third, the Exchange is proposing changes to
existing paragraph (b) of Rule 3312 to eliminate the ability of the
Exchange to deviate from the Numerical Guidelines contained in
paragraph (a)(2)(C)(i) when deciding which transactions will be
reviewed by the Exchange as potentially clearly erroneous. Fourth, the
Exchange proposes modifications to paragraphs (a)(2)(C)(i) and (iii) of
Rule 3312 consistent with the proposed changes to paragraphs
(a)(2)(C)(ii) and (iv). Finally, the Exchange proposes amending
paragraph (c)(1), related to appeals of clearly erroneous execution
decisions by the Exchange, to preserve non-appealability of all joint
rulings between the Exchange and one or more other market centers.\5\
As proposed, the provisions of paragraph (a)(2)(C), paragraph (b) and
paragraph (c)(1) of Rule 3312, as amended by this filing, would be in
effect during a pilot period set to end on December 10, 2010. If the
pilot is not either extended or made permanent by December 10, 2010,
the prior versions of paragraph (a)(2)(C), paragraph (b) and paragraph
(c)(1) of Rule 3312 would be in effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62877 (September 9,
2010), 75 FR 56633 (September 16, 2010) (SR-PHLX-2010-79).
    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62886 (September 10,
2010), 75 FR 56613 (September 16, 2010) (File Nos. SR-BATS-2010-016;
SR-BX-2010-040; SR-CBOE-2010-056; SR-CHX-2010-13; SR-EDGA-2010-03;
SR-EDGX-2010-03; SR-ISE-2010-62; SR-NASDAQ-2010-076; SR-NSX-2010-07;
SR-NYSE-2010-47; SR-NYSEAmex-2010-60; SR-NYSEArca-2010-58).
    \5\ The Exchange is also amending text in paragraphs
(a)(2)(A)(iii)B. and (e)(1) to correct minor typographical errors in
the text of the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is proposing the rule changes described below in
consultation with other markets and Commission staff 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 market and subsequent transactions that
occur before the trading pause is in effect on the Exchange. The
Exchange has also proposed additional changes to Rule 3312 that reduce
the ability of the Exchange to deviate from the objective standards set
forth in the Rule. In addition, the Exchange is modifying certain
defined terms in the rule to match definitions used by other exchanges
in order to avoid the risk of confusion. The proposed changes are
described in further detail below.
Revised Paragraph (a)(2)(C)(ii) Related to Multi-Stock Events Involving
Twenty or More Securities
    The Exchange proposes to eliminate the majority of existing
paragraph (a)(2)(C)(ii), which provides flexibility to the Exchange to
use different Numerical Guidelines or Reference Prices in various
``Unusual Circumstances.'' The Exchange proposes to replace this
paragraph with new language that would apply to Multi-Stock Events
involving twenty or more securities whose executions occurred within a
period of five minutes or less. The revised paragraph would retain
language making clear that during Multi-Stock Events involving twenty
or more securities the number of affected transactions may be such that
immediate finality is necessary to maintain a fair and orderly market
and to protect investors and the public interest. Accordingly, in such
circumstances, decisions made by the Exchange in consultation with
other markets could not be appealed. Further, as proposed, in
connection with reviews of Multi-Stock Events involving twenty or more
securities, the Exchange may use a Reference Price other than
consolidated last sale in its review of potentially clearly erroneous
executions. With the exception of those securities under review that
are subject to an individual stock trading pause as described in
proposed paragraph (a)(2)(C)(iv), and to ensure consistent application
across market centers when proposed paragraph (a)(2)(C)(ii) is invoked,
the Exchange will promptly coordinate with the other market centers to
determine the appropriate review period, which may be greater than the
period of five minutes or less that triggered application of proposed
paragraph (a)(2)(C)(ii), as well as select one or more specific points
in time prior to the transactions in question and use transaction
prices at or immediately prior to the one or more specific points in
time selected as the Reference Price. The Exchange will nullify as
clearly erroneous all transactions that are at prices equal to or
greater than 30% away from the Reference Price in each affected
security during the review period selected by the Exchange and other
markets consistent with the proposed paragraph (a)(2)(C)(ii).
    Because the Exchange and other market centers are adopting a
different threshold and standards to handle large-scale market events,
which would include events occurring during times of high volatility at
the beginning of regular trading hours, the Exchange proposes deletion
of paragraph (a)(2)(C)(iv) (``Numerical Guidelines Applicable to
Volatile Market Opens'') of the existing rule. The Exchange believes
that this provision is no longer necessary, and if maintained, could
result in extremely high Numerical Guidelines (up to 90%) in certain
circumstances.

Revised Paragraph (a)(2)(C)(iv) Related to Individual Stock Trading
Pauses
    The NASDAQ Exchange and other primary listing markets for U.S.
stocks recently amended their rules so that they may, from time to
time, issue a trading pause for an individual security if the price of
such security moves 10% or more from a sale in a preceding five-minute
period, and other exchanges have amended their rules to follow these
trading pauses. In this regard, the Exchange's approved rules for PSX
pause trading in an individual stock when the primary listing market
for such stock issues a trading pause, as provided in Rule
3100(a)(4).\6\ As described above, the Exchange is proposing to
eliminate existing paragraph (a)(2)(C)(iv) (``Numerical Guidelines
Applicable to Volatile Market Opens''). The Exchange proposes adopting
a rule, numbered as (a)(2)(C)(iv) following such elimination, that will
provide for uniform treatment of clearly erroneous execution reviews 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. The proposed rule change is necessary to
provide greater certainty of the clearly erroneous Reference Price for
transactions that trigger a trading pause (the ``Trigger Trade'') and
subsequent transactions occurring between the time of the Trigger Trade
and the time the trading pause message is received by the Exchange from
the single plan processor responsible for consolidation and
dissemination of information for the security and put into effect on
the Exchange, especially under highly volatile and active market
conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Prior to the launch of trading on PSX, the Exchange will
submit a proposed rule change to amend Rule 3100(a)(4) to reflect
changes recently approved to the corresponding rules of other
exchanges. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62884 (September 10,
2010), 75 FR 56618 (September 16, 2010) (SR-BATS-2010-018; SR-BX-
2010-044; SR-CBOE-2010-065; SR-CHX-2010-14; SR-EDGA-2010-05; SR-
EDGX-2010-05; SR-ISE-2010-66; SR-NASDAQ-2010-079; SR-NYSE-2010-49;
SR-NYSEAmex-2010-63; SR-NYSEArca-2010-61; SR-NSX-2010-08).
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62884 amended trading pause
rules originally adopted by PSX in SR-PHLX-2010-79, supra n. 3, and
by other exchanges in Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62252
(June 10, 2010), 75 FR 34186 (June 16, 2010) (SR-BATS-2010-014; SR-
EDGA-2010-01; SR-EDGX-2010-01; SR-BX-2010-037; SR-ISE-2010-48; SR-
NYSE-2010-39; SR-NYSEAmex-2010-46; SR-NYSEArca-2010-41; SR-NASDAQ-
2010-061; SR-CHX-2010-10; SR-NSX-2010-05; SR-CBOE-2010-047).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to revise paragraph (a)(2)(C)(iv) of Rule
3312 to allow the Exchange to use the price that triggered a trading
pause in an individual stock (the ``Trading Pause Trigger Price'') as
the Reference Price for clearly erroneous execution reviews of a
Trigger Trade and transactions that occur immediately after a Trigger
Trade but before a trading pause is in effect on the Exchange. As
proposed, the phrase ``Trading Pause Trigger Price'' shall mean the
price that triggered a trading pause pursuant to PHLX Rule 3100(a)(4).
The Trading Pause Trigger Price reflects a price calculated by the
primary listing market over a rolling five-minute period and may differ
from the execution price of a transaction that triggered a trading
pause. The Exchange will rely on the primary listing market that issued
an individual stock trading pause to determine and communicate the
Trading Pause Trigger Price for such stock. The Exchange proposes to
make clear in the text that the proposed standards in paragraph
(a)(2)(C)(iv) apply regardless of whether the security at issue is part
of a Multi-Stock Event involving five or more securities as described
in proposed paragraphs (a)(2)(C)(i) and (ii).
    As proposed, the Numerical Guidelines set forth in PHLX Rule
3312(a)(2)(C)(i), other than those Numerical Guidelines applicable to
Multi-Stock Events, would apply to reviews of Trigger Trades and
subsequent transactions. The Exchange proposes to review, on its own
motion pursuant to paragraph (b)(2) of the Rule, all transactions that
trigger a trading pause and subsequent transactions occurring before
the trading pause is in effect on the Exchange. The Exchange has
proposed to limit such reviews to reviews of transactions that executed
at a price lower than the Trading Pause Trigger Price in the event of a
price decline and higher than the Trading Pause Trigger Price in the
event of a price rise. Because the proposed rules for trading pauses
would only apply within Regular Trading Hours,\7\ an execution would be
reviewed and nullified as clearly erroneous if it exceeds the following
thresholds:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The term ``Regular Trading Hours'' is being renamed from
``Core Session'' in Rule 3312(a)(2)(B) as the time between 9:30 a.m.
and 4 p.m. Eastern Time. According to rules of the primary listing
markets, an individual stock trading pause can be issued based on a
Trigger Trade that occurs at any time between 9:45 a.m. and 3:35
p.m. Eastern Time. See NASDAQ Exchange Rule 4120(a)(11), NYSE Rule
80C, and NYSE Arca Rule 7.11.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Numerical guidelines (Subject
                                         transaction's % difference from
       Reference price or product           the Trading Pause Trigger
                                                      Price)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greater than $0.00 up to and including   10%.
 $25.00.
Greater than $25.00 up to and including  5%.
 $50.00.
Greater than $50.00....................  3%.
Leveraged ETF/ETN securities...........  Regular Trading Hours Numerical
                                          Guidelines multiplied by the
                                          leverage multiplier (i.e.,
                                          2x).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Revisions to Paragraph (b)
    To be consistent with other exchanges, the Exchange is eliminating
paragraph (b) and adding new paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) to separate
System Disruptions from Own Motion situations. Consistent with other
proposals made in this filing, the Exchange proposes modifying
paragraph (b) to eliminate the ability of a Senior Official to deviate
from the Numerical Guidelines contained in the Rule other than under
very limited circumstances set forth in paragraph (a)(2)(C)(iii).
    New paragraph (b)(1) provides a Senior Official of the Exchange the
ability on his or her own motion, to review and rule on executions that
result from ``any disruption or a malfunction in the operation of any
electronic communications and trading facilities of the Exchange, or
extraordinary market conditions or other circumstances in which the
nullification of transactions may be necessary for the maintenance of a
fair and orderly market or the protection of investors and the public
interest exist.''
    New paragraph (b)(2) is similar to existing Rule 3312(b) and covers
other situations where the Exchange may act on its own motion. Without
modification, the language ``extraordinary market conditions or other
circumstances * * *'' in current Rule 3312(b) would leave the Exchange
with broad discretion to deviate from the Numerical Guidelines set
forth in

paragraph (a)(2)(C)(i). Thus, the Exchange proposes narrowing the scope
of paragraph (b) so that it only permits the Exchange to nullify
transactions consistent with that paragraph (including at a lower
Numerical Guideline) if there is a disruption or malfunction in the use
of the Exchange's system covered by proposed Rule 3312(b)(1).
    For the same reason, the Exchange proposes eliminating the words
``use or'' from the language in subsection (b) to make clear that the
provision only applies to a disruption or malfunction of the Exchange's
system (and not of a user of the Exchange's systems).
    Paragraph (b)(2) gives a Senior Official of the Exchange the
ability on his or her own motion to review transactions as potentially
clearly erroneous. Consistent with the goal of achieving more objective
and standard results, the Exchange proposes deleting language in
existing paragraph (b) that would allow the Exchange to deviate from
the Numerical Guidelines contained in paragraph (a)(2)(C)(i). In
addition, the Exchange proposes to make clear that any Senior Official
reviewing transactions on his or her own motion must follow the
guidelines set forth in proposed paragraph (a)(2)(C)(iv), if
applicable. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to modify paragraph
(b)(2) to state that an officer must rely on paragraphs (a)(2)(C)(i)-
(iv) of Rule 3312 when reviewing transactions on his or her own motion.
Additional Conforming Revisions to Paragraphs (a)(2)(C)(i) and
(a)(2)(C)(iii)
    Based on proposed paragraph (a)(2)(C)(ii), the Exchange has
proposed certain conforming changes to paragraphs (a)(2)(C)(i) and
(iii) of the existing Rule, as described below.
    Under current Rule 3312, a transaction may be found to be clearly
erroneous only if the price of the transaction to buy (sell) that is
the subject of the complaint is greater than (less than) the Reference
Price by an amount that equals or exceeds the Numerical Guidelines set
forth in paragraphs (a)(2)(C)(i) of the Rule. The ``Reference Price''
is currently defined as ``the consolidated last sale immediately prior
to the execution(s) under review except for in Unusual Circumstances *
* * .'' The Exchange proposes modifying paragraph (a)(2)(C)(i)
consistent with the changes described above such that the Exchange
shall use the consolidated last sale immediately prior to the
execution(s) under review as the Reference Price except for: (A) Multi-
Stock Events involving twenty or more securities, as described in
proposed paragraph (a)(2)(C)(ii); (B) transactions not involving a
Multi-Stock Event as described in proposed paragraph (a)(2)(C)(ii) that
trigger a trading pause and subsequent transactions, as described in
proposed paragraph (a)(2)(C)(iv), in which case the Reference Price
shall be determined in accordance with that paragraph (a)(2)(C)(iv);
and (C) in other circumstances, such as, for example, relevant news
impacting a security or securities, periods of extreme market
volatility, sustained illiquidity, or widespread system issues, where
use of a different Reference Price is necessary for the maintenance of
a fair and orderly market and the protection of investors and the
public interest. The Exchange also proposes modifying paragraph
(a)(2)(C)(i) to reduce uncertainty as to the applicability of the
Numerical Guidelines, by requiring a finding that an execution was
clearly erroneous if such execution exceeds the Numerical Guidelines,
subject only to the Additional Factors included in paragraph
(a)(2)(C)(iii). Moreover, the Exchange proposes revising the existing
description for Multi-Stock Events that is contained on the Numerical
Guidelines chart to make clear that different Numerical Guidelines
apply for Multi-Stock Events involving five or more, but less than
twenty, securities whose executions occurred within a period of five
minutes or less. In addition, the Exchange proposes adding to the
Numerical Guidelines chart a row that contains the Numerical Guidelines
(30%) for Multi-Stock Events involving twenty or more securities whose
executions occurred within a period of five minutes or less.
    The Exchange proposes clarifying paragraph (a)(2)(C)(iii) to make
clear that the additional factors set forth in that paragraph are not
intended to provide any discretion to an Exchange official to deviate
from the guidelines that apply to Multi-Stock Events or to transactions
in securities subject to individual stock trading pauses.
    The Exchange also proposes amending paragraph (c)(1), related to
appeals of clearly erroneous execution decisions by the Exchange, to
preserve non-appealability of all joint rulings between the Exchange
and one or more other market centers. The Exchange believes that
certainty and consistency is critical to reviews of related executions
that span multiple market centers. Accordingly, although the Exchange
has proposed deletion of such language from existing paragraph
(a)(2)(C)(iii), the Exchange proposes adding such language back in to
paragraph (c)(1) to make clear that joint market rulings are not
appealable.
    Finally, the Exchange is amending text in paragraphs
(a)(2)(A)(iii)B. and (e)(1) to correct minor typographical errors in
the text of the existing rule.
2. Statutory Basis
    The rule change proposed in this submission 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.\8\ In particular, the
proposed change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\
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, and, in general, protect investors and
the public interest. The proposed rule change is also designed to
support the principles of Section 11A(a)(1) \10\ of the Act in that it
seeks to assure fair competition among brokers and dealers and among
exchange markets. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule meets
these requirements in that it promotes transparency and uniformity
across markets concerning reviews of potentially clearly erroneous
executions in various contexts, including reviews in the context of a
Multi-Stock Event involving twenty or more securities and reviews
resulting from a Trigger Trade and any executions occurring immediately
after a Trigger Trade but before a trading pause is in effect on the
Exchange. Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes
enhance the objectivity of decisions made by the Exchange with respect
to clearly erroneous executions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; or (iii)
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 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, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative delay. The Commission hereby grants that request.\13\ The
Commission believes that waiver of the operative delay is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest because it has
recently approved Phlx's proposal to initiate trading on PSX, which it
plans to do on October 8, 2010, and believes that the proposed rule
change should be implemented on that date to ensure that the Exchange's
rules on clearly erroneous trades are consistent with the recently
approved changes to the clearly erroneous execution rules of the other
markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend 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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-Phlx-2010-125 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 No. SR-Phlx-2010-125. 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 Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies
of the submission,\14\ 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 a.m. and 3
p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and
copying at the principal office of Phlx. All comments received will be
posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File No. SR-Phlx-2010-125 and should be submitted on or
before October 27, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-25137 Filed 10-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P