Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 85 / Friday, May 2, 1997 / Corrections 24161

of Compliance Inspections and

Examinations would examine a fund’s

compliance with the 3-day mailing

requirement, and the Commission

would bring an enforcement action in

an appropriate case for failing to comply

with the requirement. See also Profile

Release, supra note 1 (discussing the

Commission’s intention in connection

with the profile initiative to monitor a

fund’s compliance with the proposed

requirement to send the fund’s

prospectus within 3 days of a request).’’

6. On page 10914, in column two,

footnote 178 should read ‘‘178See supra

note 149.’’

7. On page 10915, in column three,

footnote 194 ‘‘supra note’’ should read

‘‘supra note 2.’’

8. On page 10916, in column one, in

the fifth paragraph, in the l0th line

‘‘(‘‘NASD’) ’’ should read ‘‘(‘‘NASD’’). ’’

9. On page 10922, in column three,

the amendatory instruction under ‘‘Part

230’’ should be designated as: ‘‘1. The

authority....., 2. Revise....., and 3.

Amend.....’’.

10. On page 10923, in column one,

the amendatory instruction at the top of

the page should be designated as: ‘‘4.

Amend......’’.

11. On the same page, in the same

column, the amendatory instruction

under ‘‘Part 270’’ should be designated

as: ‘‘7. The authority.....’’.

12. On page 10926, in column two,

item 2 should read as follows:‘‘Item 2.

Risk/Return Summary: Investments,

Risks, and Performance

Include the following information in

the same order and in the same or

substantially similar question-andanswer format:’’.

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 270

[Release No. IC-22530; File No. S7-11-97]

RIN: 3235-AH11

Investment Company Names

Correction

In proposed rule document 97–5375

beginning on page 10955 in the issue of

Monday, March 10, 1997 make the

following corrections:

(1) On page 10958, in the first column

footnote 21 should read: 21See ‘‘The Scope of the US Mutual Fund

Industry: Its Regulation and Industry

Trends,’’ Remarks by Isaac C. Hunt, Jr.,

Commissioner, SEC, before the Business

Roundtable on ‘‘The Development of the

Russian Mutual (Unit) Fund Industry and

Related Investment Opportunities’’ at the

General Consulate of the Russian Federation,

New York, New York (Sept. 20, 1996)

(discussing St. Petersburg Long Distance

Telephone company, which is organized in

Canada and whose securities are traded

outside of Russia). See also, e.g., rule 3b-4

under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

[17 CFR 240.3b-4] (defining a ‘‘foreign

issuer’’).

(2) On the same page, in the second

column the two headings should read

‘‘3. Tax-Exempt Investment Companies’’

and ‘‘4. Applying the 80% Investment

Requirement’’.

(3)On the same page, in the third

column, in the second paragraph, in the

eleventh line ‘‘total assets’’ should read

‘‘total assets’’.

(4) On page 10959, in the first

column:

(a) Footnote 33 should read: 33Proposed rule 35d-1(b)(3). See Letter to

Registrants at II.E (Feb. 25, 1994) (‘‘1994

GCL’’). See also Form N-1A Release, supra

note 1 (proposing to require a fund to

disclose, if applicable, certain information in

its prospectus about the possibility of taking

temporary defensive positions).

(b) Footnote 34 should read: 34Many investment companies have the

flexibility to assume temporary defensive

positions and depart from investment

policies unrelated to their names. See 1994

GCL, supra note 33 (noting that investment

companies may depart from a policy to

concentrate in a particular industry or group

of industries to avoid losses in response to

adverse market, economic, political, or other

conditions).

(5) On the same page, in the third

column, ‘‘In General’’ should read ‘‘1. In

General’’.

(6) On page 10960, in the first

column, footnote 40 should read: 40See In re Alliance North Am. Gov’t

Income Trust, Inc. Securities Litigation, No.

95 Civ. 0330 (LLM), 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

14209, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 27, 1996); The

Private Investment Fund for Governmental

Personnel, Inc., 37 S.E.C. 484, 487-88 (1957).

The 80% investment requirement generally

would apply to a company’s investment

focus as disclosed in the company’s

prospectus. The Commission, however,

recognizes that the 80% investment

requirement would not be appropriate in all

cases (e.g., with respect to an investment

company that uses the word ‘‘balanced’’ in

its name).

In connection with the proposed

amendments to Form N-1A, information

about the organization and operations of

investment companies and Division

interpretive positions is proposed to be

incorporated in a new ‘‘Investment Company

Registration Package,’’ which would be

prepared by the Division. See Form N-1A

Release, supra note 1. The Investment

Company Registration Package would

include general guidance about avoiding the

use of a name that is the same as or similar

to the name of another investment company

and about names that a reasonable investor

may conclude suggest more than one

investment focus including, for example, use

of names that include the terms ‘‘small, mid,

or large capitalization.’’

(7) On the same page, in the second

column, footnote 41 should read 41The term ‘‘bond,’’ by itself, does not

imply that the security has a particular

maturity. See also 1994 GCL, supra note 33,

at III.A (indicating that a fund should

describe in its prospectus what it considers

to be a ‘‘bond’’).

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D