7><LIBKB>J G??>I>= KAIGL@A 09E;IB=@> 3FM>JKE>FK 6>J>9I<A! 3F<#! 9 ;IGC>I"=>9D>I! E>E;>I 2346/$7350# /=MBJGIP J>IMB<>J G??>I>= KAIGL@A 09E;IB=@>

3FM>JKE>FK 6>J>9I<A /=MBJGIJ! 3F<#! 9 6>@BJK>I>= 3FM>JKE>FK /=MBJ>I# 0A9ID>KGF 2BF9F<B9D 9F= 09E;IB=@> 9I> J>H9I9K> >FKBKB>J#

&-* 4GIIBJ 1IBM>

6G<A>JK>I! 4>N 8GIC &)+&%

- ,. * + ) ' ( ' "$ & & "% # ' #

?9O. *,*#'))#(%*-

...!#&",($-+*%'*"*#'"(!#+)

Office of Regulations and Interpretations

Office of Exemption Determinations

Employee Benefits Security Administration

US Department of Labor

200 Constitution Ave, NW

Washington, DC 20210

Re: RIN 1210-AB32 Proposed Best Interest Contract Exemption

Ladies and Gentlemen:

We are a small firm. Most of our clients have all of their investments with us and most own an IRA. We pride

ourselves on the work we do with and for our clients. We get to know our clients so that we have a clear

understanding of their short and long term goals. We engage in ongoing study of the markets and various

products so that when we meet with our clients we are well educated. This enables us to clearly explain how

events and trends impact their investments and to make appropriate ongoing recommendations. We agree with

the notion of protecting the public interest and believe that the most valuable tools to investors are knowledge

and resources.

It is our concern that if this proposal succeeds, it will ultimately fail the average investor.

The proposed changes are significant. If passed, they would require massive industry wide changes to

compliance programs, legal structures, and technical systems. The cost of implementation in man hours and

actual dollars is staggering. Some broker dealers will simply not conduct ERISA business any longer, while

others will find ways to pass the costs on to the brokers they supervise. Brokers will act similarly; they will either

choose to drop ERISA business or find ways to pass on the costs. Ultimately the investor will bear the brunt in

the form of limited resources and increased expenses.

Interestingly, the financial services industry is the only industry where efforts are under way to regulate

compensation. The proposal does not outright prohibit commissions and 12b-1 fees, but the Best Interest

Contract Exemption (BICE) is clearly an effort to curtail these types of compensation.

Many of the BICE requirements are simply redundant. Acknowledgment of fiduciary status, agreement to adhere

to best interest requirements, a warranty that the broker will comply with the law, a warranty that the broker will

avoid and mitigate conflicts of interests ! these would all be requirements under the law and to re-state them in a

contractual agreement is superfluous.

BICE requires both the broker and the firm (presumably the broker dealer) to enter into a contract with the

investor prior to providing any advice ! prior to becoming a client. The time involved for the broker is obvious, but

consider the investor; the amount of pre-advice time involved is significant: review and sign the contract without
any discussion about their investment, then the broker signs the contract and submits it to the broker dealer

for review and signature. The pre-advice contract process is potentially lengthy and confusing.

Of particular concern are the investment limitations under BICE. The DOL seeks to protect investors by

forcing brokers and broker dealers into a fiduciary relationship as a method of guaranteeing that the clients"

best interests are served, but simultaneously limits the scope of products that the investor can choose from

and that the broker can recommend.

Putting any inconvenience to the broker aside, the biggest impact to disallowing commissions and 12b-1

fees will be on the investor. BICE is clearly designed to push variable forms of compensation out of the

ERISA arena, ultimately encouraging anyone who uses commissionable products to drop their ERISA

business. This leaves the investor, particularly the small to average investor, with even fewer professional

resources.

We feel strongly that though the intentions behind the Conflict of Interest Proposal are good, the proposal

fails to consider any unintended consequences to the average investor ! the very people it seeks to protect.

In effect, this rule will drive honest, experienced professionals and firms to drop ERISA business leaving

investors confused and wondering what to do next. Advisors and firms who choose to continue conducting

ERISA business will be forced to increase their fees to clients due simply to the increased cost of system

maintenance and regulatory compliance.

In the end, investors will pay more for fewer resources and limited options.

New and more complex regulation is not the answer. Instead we should focus on streamlining, clarifying

and enforcing the existing regulation.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important proposal. We appreciate the DOL"s

consideration.

Sincerely,

April Johnson

Financial Advisor, Partner