Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 3, 1995 / Notices 21837

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL

MANAGEMENT

The National Partnership Council;

Meeting

AGENCY: Office of Personnel

Management.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel

Management (OPM) announces the next

meeting of the National Partnership

Council (the Council). Notice of this

meeting is required under the Federal

Advisory Committee Act.

TIME AND PLACE: The Council will meet

May 10, 1995, at 1 p.m., in the OPM

Conference Center, Room 1350,

Theodore Roosevelt Building, 1900 E

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20415–

0001. The conference center is located

on the first floor.

TYPE OF MEETING: This meeting will be

open to the public. Seating will be

available on a first-served basis.

Handicapped individuals wishing to

attend should contact OPM at the

number shown below to obtain

appropriate accommodations.

POINT OF CONTACT: Douglas K. Walker,

National Partnership Council, Executive

Secretariat, Office of Personnel

Management, Theodore Roosevelt

Building, 1900 E Street, NW., Room

5315, Washington, DC 20415–0001,

(202) 606–1000.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Council will receive reports on and

discuss activities contained in the

strategic action plan for 1995 that was

adopted at the January 10, 1995,

meeting.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: We invite

interested persons and organizations to

submit written comments or

recommendations. Mail or deliver your

comments or recommendations to Mr.

Douglas K. Walker at the address shown

above. Comments should be received by

May 5, in order to be considered at the

May 10, meeting.

Office of Personnel Management.

James B. King,

Director.

[FR Doc. 95–10779 Filed 5–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6325–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

Issuer Delisting; Notice of Application

To Withdraw From Listing and

Registration; (Carrington Laboratories,

Inc., Common Stock, $.01 Par Value

and the Related Preferred Share

Purchase Rights Issued Pursuant to its

Rights Agreement Dated September

19, 1991) File No. 1–6395

April 27, 1995.

The Carrington Laboratories, Inc.,

(‘‘Company’’) has filed an application

with the Securities and Exchange

Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant

to Section 12(d) of the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) and Rule

12d2–2(d) promulgated thereunder, to

withdraw the above specified securities

(‘‘Securities’’) from listing and

registration on the American Stock

Exchange, Inc. (‘‘Amex’’).

The reasons alleged in the application

for withdrawing the Securities from

listing and registration include the

following:

According to the Company, its Board

of Directors unanimously approved

resolutions on February 9, 1995 to

withdraw the Securities from listing on

the Exchange and, instead, list the

Securities on the Nasdaq/NMS. The

decision of the Board followed a lengthy

study of the matter, and was based upon

the belief that listing of the Securities on

Nasdaq will be more beneficial to the

Company and its stockholders than the

present listing on the Exchange because:

(a) The Nasdaq system of multiple,

competing market makers will provide

the Company with increased visibility

within the financial community, thereby

encouraging greater investor awareness

of the Company’s activities;

(b) The Nasdaq system will enable the

Company to attract its own group of

market makers and expand the capital

base available for purchases of the

Securities;

(c) The Nasdaq system will stimulate

increased demand for the Securities and

result in greater liquidity for the

Company’s shareholders; and

(d) The firm making a market in the

Securities on Nasdaq will be more likely

to issue research reports on the

Company, which will increase the

availability of information about the

Company and the Securities and

enhance the Company’s visibility to

investors.

Any interested person may, on or

before May 18, 1995, submit by letter to

the Secretary of the Securities and

Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20549, facts

bearing upon whether the application

has been made in accordance with the

rules of the Amex and what terms, if

any, should be imposed by the

Commission for the protection of

investors. The Commission, based on

the information submitted to it, will

issue an order granting the application

after the date mentioned above, unless

the Commission determines to order a

hearing on the matter.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.

Jonathan G. Katz,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–10854 Filed 5–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Rel. No. IC–21032; File No. 812–9270]

Equitable Variable Life Insurance

Company, et al.

April 26, 1995.

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange

Commission (the ‘‘SEC’’ or the

‘‘Commission’’).

ACTION: Notice of application for an

order under the Investment Company

Act of 1940 (the ‘‘1940 Act’’).

APPLICANTS: Equitable Variable Life

Insurance Company (‘‘Equitable

Variable’’), Separate Account FP of

Equitable Variable Life Insurance

Company (the ‘‘Account’’), and Equico

Securities, Inc. (‘‘Equico’’).

RELEVANT 1940 ACT SECTION AND RULE:

Order requested under Section 6(c) of

the 1940 Act for exemptions from

Section 27(a)(3) thereof and subsections

(b)(13)(ii) and (d)(1)(ii)(A) of Rule 6e–

3(T) thereunder.

SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicants

seek an order to permit Equitable

Variable to make available an

Accounting Benefit Rider (‘‘the Rider’’)

to certain flexible premium variable life

insurance policies (‘‘Policies’’) it

currently issues. The Rider permits the

waiver of specified percentages of a

Policy’s contingent deferred sales charge

during the early policy years. The Rider

is designed to minimize the negative

impact to earnings that results under

generally accepted accounting

principles in connection with the

purchase of a Policy.

FILING DATE: The application was filed

on October 4, 1994, and amended and

restated on April 17, 1995.

HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An

order granting the application will be

issued unless the Commission orders a

hearing. Interested persons may request

a hearing by writing to the Secretary of

the Commission and serving the
21838 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 3, 1995 / Notices

1The Policies shall be referred to more

specifically herein as the ‘‘IL 2000 Series,’’ The ‘‘IL

Plus Series,’’ and the ‘‘COLI Series.’’ The relevant

file numbers are 33–40590 (IL 2000 Series) and 33–

83948 (IL Plus and COLI Series).

2Under the COLI Series, the Premium Sales

Charge is deducted on a deferred basis from Policy

account value rather than from gross premium.

3No deductions from premium are refunded

under a Policy that provides for deferred deduction

of the Premium Sales Charge.

4The provisions of the Rider are incorporated

into the contract form for the COLI Series. The term

‘‘Rider’’ as used herein, includes the provisions of

the COLI Series contract.

5These requirements may vary in certain states.

6This criterion does not apply to the COLI Series.

Applicants with a copy of the request,

personally or by mail. Hearing requests

must be received by the Commission by

5:30 p.m., on May 22, 1995, and should

be accompanied by proof of service on

the Applicants in the form of an

affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of

service. Hearing requests should state

the nature of the writer’s interest, the

reason for the request, and the issues

contested. Persons may request

notification of a hearing by writing to

the Secretary of the Commission.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, SEC, 450 Fifth

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549.

Equitable Variable and the Account, 787

Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10019.

Equico, 1755 Broadway, New York, NY

10019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patrice M. Pitts, Special Counsel, or

Wendy Finck Friedlander, Deputy

Chief, Office of Insurance Products,

Division of Investment Management, at

(202) 942–0670.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

following is a summary of the

application. The complete application is

available for a fee from the Public

Reference Branch of the Commission.

Applicants’ Representations

1. Equitable Variable is a stock life

insurance company organized in 1972

under the laws of the State of New York.

2. Equitable Variable established the

Account as a segregated investment

account in 1985, pursuant to the

insurance laws of New York, for the

purpose of funding variable life

insurance policies, including the

Policies.1 The Account is registered

with the Commission as a unit

investment trust under the 1940 Act.

Equitable Variable is the depositor of

the Account.

3. Equico is registered as a brokerdealer under the Securities Exchange

Act of 1934. Equico distributes the

variable life insurance policies funded

by the Account, including the Policies.

4. Equitable Variable deducts a

monthly administrative expense charge

and cost of insurance charges from the

Policy account value, and reserves the

right to assess a charge for transfers

among the various investment options

available under the Policies. In addition

to deductions made from premiums and

Policy account value, Equitable Variable

assesses a charge against the assets of

the Account for mortality and expense

risks borne by it under the Policies. All

administrative and other charges in

connection with the Policies will

comply with all applicable requirements

of Rule 6e–3(T) under the 1940 Act,

subject only to the relief requested in

this application.

5. Among the charges assessed under

the Policies are: (a) A premium sales

charge deducted either on a front-end or

a deferred basis (the ‘‘Premium Sales

Charge’’); and (b) a contingent deferred

sales charge (the ‘‘Surrender Charge’’).

The guaranteed maximum Premium

Sales Charge is 6% of each premium

payment (some Policies have lower

guaranteed maximums). On a current

basis, Equitable Variable intends to limit

the cumulative Premium Sales Charge

on the IL 2000 and IL Plus Series to less

than the guaranteed maximum.2

6. The Rider provides that, upon

surrender of a Policy: (a) All or a portion

of the deductions from premiums

(charge for premium taxes and Premium

Sales Charge) will be refunded if the

Policy deducts the Premium Sales

Charge; 3 and (b) all or a portion of the

Surrender Charge (and, in the case of

the IL Plus Series, the administrative

surrender charge) will be waived if the

Policy is surrendered during the early

policy years. The amount refunded or

waived decreases proportionately in

each of the second through sixth policy

years as follows:

Surrender in policy

year

Percent

of premium deductions

refunded

Percent

of surrender

charges

waived

1 ................................ 100 100

2 ................................ 67 80

3 ................................ 33 60

4 ................................ 0 40

5 ................................ 0 20

6 and later ................. 0 0

7. Applicants represent that the net

effect of implementation of the Rider is

to reduce the amount of sales charges

that would otherwise be applicable

during the early policy years.

Applicants further represent that,

because the waiver percentages under

the Rider decrease in each of the second

through the sixth policy years,

implementation of the Rider could

cause a policyowner to pay

proportionately more Surrender Charge

than would have been paid had the

Policy been surrendered in a preceding

policy year.

8. There is no specific fee or charge

related to the Rider.4 Equitable Variable

intends to make the Rider available with

Policies purchased through corporations

or partnerships under the following

circumstances: 5 (a) A minimum of five

lives are insured; (b) proposed insureds

are highly compensated; (c) the Policies

have an average Face Amount of at least

$500,000; 6 (d) the initial premium

payment is made with corporate or

partnership funds; and (e) the aggregate

annualized first year premium for all

Policies is at least $150,000.

9. In Equitable Variable’s experience,

policyowners of the type to which the

Rider will be available are unlikely to

surrender their Policies within the fiveyear period during which the Rider is

operative. Applicants represent that the

amount of the Surrender Charge has not

been increased to compensate for the

fact that, because of the Rider, not all

Policies will be subject to the full

Surrender Charges that otherwise would

apply.

Applicants’ Legal Analysis

1. Section 27(a)(3) of the 1940 Act

provides, in effect, that the amount of

sales Charge deducted from any of the

first twelve monthly payments of a

periodic payment plan certificate may

not exceed proportionately the amount

deducted from any other such payment,

and that the amount deducted from any

subsequent payment may not exceed

proportionately the amount deducted

from any other subsequent payment.

This prohibition is referred to

commonly as the ‘‘stair-step’’ rule.

2. Applicants request an exemption

from the stair step requirements of

Section 27(a)(3) and Rule 6e–

3(T)(b)(13)(ii) and (d)(1)(ii)(A) to the

extent necessary because, until the

seventh policy year, the Rider could

cause a policyowner to pay

proportionately more Surrender Charge

than would have been paid had the

Policy been surrendered in a preceding

policy year. Applicants submit that the

requested relief is necessary only

because they have reduced the amount

of the Surrender Charge otherwise

payable under the Policy during the

early policy years, a procedure they

contend is favorable to policyowners.

3. Subsection (b)(13)(ii) of Rule 6e–

3(T) under the 1940 Act, in pertinent

part, provides an exemption from

Section 27(a)(3), provided that the

proportionate amount of sales charge
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 3, 1995 / Notices 21839

1Amendment No. 1 made non-substantive,

clarifying changes to the proposal. See Letter from

James E. Buck, Senior Vice President and Secretary,

NYSE, to Glen Barrentine, Team Leader, SEC dated

April 17, 1995.

2A LOC order is a limited price order entered for

execution at the closing price if the closing price

is within the limit specified. See Securities

Exchange Act Release No. 33706 (March 3, 1994),

59 FR 111093.

3A MOC order is a market order to be executed

in its entirety at the closing price on the Exchange.

See NYSE Rule 13.

deducted from any payment does not

exceed the proportionate amount

deducted from any prior payment. This

general proviso holds true unless the

increase in sales load deduction is

caused by reductions in the annual cost

of insurance or reductions in sales load

for amounts transferred to a variable life

insurance policy from another plan of

insurance. Applicants represent that

neither exception applies in the present

case.

4. Subsection (d)(1) of Rule 6e–3(T)

provides relief similar to that provided

by subsection (b)(13)(ii), but for sales

charges deducted from other than

premiums, and provided that the sales

load deducted pursuant to any method

permitted thereunder does not exceed

the proportionate amount of sales load

deducted prior thereto pursuant to the

same method. Applicants represent that

the express language of subsection

(d)(1)(ii)(A) prohibits the actual

deduction of proportionately greater

amounts.

5. Applicants represent that although

the Rider causes the Surrender Charge

to increase over a limited period of time,

the actual amount of the Surrender

charge deducted in connection with the

IL 2000 Series and the IL Plus Series

never is proportionately greater than

any Surrender Charge deducted prior

thereto, because either: (a) There has

been no prior Surrender Charge

deduction; or (b) the prior deduction

resulted from a face amount decrease to

which the Rider does not apply, with

the result that the Surrender Charge

percentages applicable to the decrease

are the higher percentages specified in

the Policy.

6. Applicants state that, unlike under

the IL 2000 Series and the IL Plus

Series, however, under the COLI Series,

the Rider applies to amounts of

Surrender Charges imposed upon

decreases in the face amount. Therefore,

the effective rate of a Surrender Charge

imposed upon a decrease in the face

amount under the COLI Series during

the first five Policy years may be lower

than the Surrender Charge applicable to

a later decrease in the face amount,

surrender, or termination of a Policy.

Applicants represent that this

phenomenon results solely from the fact

that the Rider—which is beneficial to

policyowners—applies to decreases in

face amount (as well as surrenders and

Policy termination) under the COLI

Series.

7. Applicants assert that Section

27(a)(3), in conjunction with the other

sales charge limitations in the 1940 Act,

was designed to address the perceived

abuse of periodic payment plan

certificates that deducted large amounts

of front-end sales charges so early in the

life of the plan that an investor

redeeming in the early periods would

recoup little of his or her investment.

Applicants contend that waiver of an

amount of Surrender Charge otherwise

payable under the Policy upon

surrender through operation of the Rider

does not present the abuses addressed

in Section 27(a)(3); indeed, operation of

the Rider could further the purposes of

the 1940 Act.

8. Applicants also assert that one

purpose behind Section 27(h)(3) of the

1940 Act, a provision similar to Section

27(a)(3), is to discourage unduly

complicated sales charges. Applicants

submit that this also may be deemed to

be a purpose of Section 27(a)(3) and

subsections (b)(3)(ii) and (d)(1) of Rule

6e–3(T). Applicants submit that the

variation to the Policies’ sales charge

structure effected by the Rider is

relatively straightforward and easily

understood, as compared to that of

many other variable life insurance

Policies currently being offered.

Moreover, Applicants represent that

eligible policyowners will benefit from

the sales charge structure effected by the

Rider, and that the prospectuses for the

Policies, or supplements thereto, will

contain disclosure informing

prospective eligible policyowners of the

effect of the Rider on the sales charges

under the Policies.

Applicants’ Conclusion

Applicants submit that, for the

reasons and based upon the facts set

forth above, the requested exemptions

from Section 27(a)(3) of the 1940 Act

and subsections (b)(13)(ii) and

(d)(1)(ii)(A) of Rule 6e–3(T) under the

1940 Act—to permit Equitable Variable

to make a Rider available under the

Policies—meet the standards of Section

6(c) of the 1940 Act. In this regard,

Applicants submit that the exemptions

are necessary or appropriate in the

public interest and consistent with the

protection of investors and the purposes

fairly intended by the policies and

provisions of the 1940 Act.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Investment Management, pursuant to

delegated authority.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–10797 Filed 5–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Release No. 34–35653; File No. SR–NYSE–

95–09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by

the New York Stock Exchange, Inc.

Relating to Entry of Limit-at-the-Close

Orders

April 27, 1995.

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Act’’), 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1), notice is

hereby given that on March 3, 1995, the

New York Stock Exchange, Inc.

(‘‘NYSE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the

Securities and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’) the proposed

rule change, and on April 18, 1995, filed

Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule

change,1 as described in Items I, II and

III below, which Items have been

prepared by the self-regulatory

organization. The Commission is

publishing this notice to solicit

comments on the proposed rule change

from interested persons.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Terms of Substance of

the Proposed Rule Change

The proposed rule change would

provide for a one-year pilot for the entry

of limit-at-the-close (‘‘LOC’’) orders 2 to

offset a market-at-the-close (‘‘MOC’’)

order 3 imbalance of 50,000 shares or

more in all stocks for which MOC order

imbalances are published.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

In its filing with the Commission, the

self-regulatory organization included

statements concerning the purpose of

and basis for the proposed rule change

and discussed any comments it received

on the proposed rule change. The text

of these statements may be examined at

the places specified in Item IV below.

The self-regulatory organization has

prepared summaries, set forth in

Sections A, B, and C below, of the most

significant aspects of such statements.