3694 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 1995 / Notices

relief with respect to the same issues

addressed in this application.

5. Applicants represent that the

mortality and expense risk charge is

reasonable in relation to the risks

undertaken by the company and within

the range of industry practice with

respect to comparable annuity products.

Applicants base this representation on

an analysis of the mortality risks, taking

into consideration such factors as any

contractual right to increase charges

above current levels, the guaranteed

annuity purchase rates, the nature of the

death benefit provided, the number of

transfers permitted without charge and

the ability to make free withdrawals.

The Company represents that it will

maintain at its principal office a

memorandum, available to the

Commission upon request, setting forth

in detail this analysis.

6. Applicants acknowledge that it is

possible that the Company’s revenues

from the contingent deferred sales

charge could be less than its costs of

distributing the Contracts. In that case,

the excess distribution costs would have

to be paid out of the Company’s general

assets, including the profits, if any, from

the mortality and expense risk charge.

In those circumstances, a portion of the

mortality and expense risk charge might

be viewed as offsetting a portion of the

costs relating to the distribution of the

Contracts. The Company represents that

there is a reasonable likelihood that the

proposed distribution financing

arrangements will benefit the Separate

Account and Contract Owners. The

basis for such a conclusion will be set

forth in a memorandum maintained by

the Company at its principal office and

available to the Commission upon

request.

7. The Company represents that the

Separate Account will invest only in

management investment companies that

undertake, in the event the company

adopts a plan to finance distribution

expenses under Rule 12b–1 under the

1940 Act, to have a board of directors,

a majority of whom are not interested

persons of the company within the

meaning of Section 2(a)(19) of the 1940

Act, formulate and approve any such

plan.

8. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the 1940

Act, the Applicants also request that the

Commission issue an order to provide

exemptive relief from Section 22(d) to

the extent necessary to permit the

Applicants to waive the contingent

deferred sales charge under the

Contracts and Future Contracts in the

event of the contingencies triggering the

right to make the medically related or a

disability related free withdrawal as

defined above.

9. Section 22(d) of the 1940 Act

prohibits a registered investment

company, its principal underwriter or a

dealer in its securities from selling any

redeemable security issued by such

registered investment company to any

person except at a public offering price

described in the prospectus. Rule 6c–8

adopted under the 1940 Act permits

variable annuity separate accounts to

impose a deferred sales charge.

Although Rule 6c–8, unlike proposed

Rule 6c–10, does not impose any

conditions on the ability of the

investment company involved to

provide for variations in the deferred

sales charges, Rule 6c–8 (again unlike

proposed Rule 6c–10) does not provide

an exemption from Section 22(d).

Applicants recognize that the proposed

waiver of the contingent deferred sales

charge in connection with ‘‘medically

related free withdrawals’’ or ‘‘disability

related free withdrawals’’ described

above could be viewed as causing the

Contracts to be sold at other than a

uniform offering price. Rule 22d–1 is

not directly applicable to Applicants’

proposed waiver of the contingent

deferred sales charge because that rule

has been interpreted as granting relief

only for scheduled variations in frontend sales loads, not deferred sales loads.

10. Rule 22d–2 under the 1940 Act

exempts registered variable annuity

accounts, their principal underwriters,

dealers and their sponsoring insurance

companies from Section 22(d) to the

extent necessary to permit variations in

the sales load or in any administrative

charge or other deductions from the

purchase payments, provided that such

variations reflect differences in costs or

services, are not unfairly discriminatory

and are adequately described in the

prospectus. Applicants, however, do not

represent that the waiver of the

withdrawal charge under the defined

circumstances reflects differences in

sales costs or services, and, for that

reason, Applicants do not rely on Rule

22d–2 for the requested relief, even

assuming that Rule 22d–2 does apply to

deferred sales loads.

11. Applicants submit that the

proposed waiver is consistent with the

policies of Section 22(d) and the rules

promulgated thereunder. One of the

purposes of Section 22(d) is to prevent

an investment company from

discriminating among investors by

charging different prices to different

investors. Applicants represent that, to

the extent permitted by state law, the

provisions relating to ‘‘medically related

free withdrawals’’ or ‘‘disability related

free withdrawals’’ will be included in

all Contracts. Eligibility will be based on

the Contract Owner experiencing the

defined medically related contingencies.

Therefore, the benefit will not unfairly

discriminate among Contract Owners.

Applicants submit that the waiver is

advantageous to Contract Owners by

permitting them, upon experiencing a

defined contingency, to make

withdrawals from the Contract without

imposition of the contingent deferred

sales charge. Applicants represent that

the waiver will not result in dilution of

the interests of any other Contract

Owners. Applicants also submit that

waiving the contingent deferred sales

charge under such circumstances will

not result in the occurrence of any of the

abuses that Section 22(d) is designed to

prevent.

12. Applicants represent that the

waiver of the contingent deferred sales

charge in connection with ‘‘medically

related free withdrawals’’ and

‘‘disability related free withdrawals’’

meets the substantive requirements of

Rule 22d–1 in that the waiver will be

uniformly available to all eligible

Contract Owners, except where

prohibited by state law, and that this

provision will be adequately described

in the prospectus of the Contracts.

Conclusion

Applicants assert that, for the reasons

and upon the facts set forth above, the

requested exemptions from Sections

22(d), 26(a)(2) and 27(c)(2) of the 1940

Act to permit the Company (i) to deduct

the mortality and expense risk charge

from the assets of the Separate Account

under the Contracts and (ii) to waive the

contingent deferred sales charge for

defined ‘‘medically related free

withdrawals’’ and ‘‘disability related

free withdrawals’’ under the Contracts

meet the standards in Section 6(c) of the

1940 Act. Applicants assert that the

exemptions requested are necessary and

appropriate in the public interest and

consistent with the protection of

investors and 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. 95–1107 Filed 1–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

THRIFT DEPOSITOR PROTECTION

OVERSIGHT BOARD

Affordable Housing Advisory Board

Meeting

AGENCY: Thrift Depositor Protection

Oversight Board.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 1995 / Notices 3695

ACTION: Notice of meeting locations.

SUMMARY: This is to announce the

meeting locations for Region 2 and

Region 5 of the Series 19 Regional

Advisory Board meetings scheduled

from January 18, through February 2 as

published in the Federal Register,

January 4, 1995, page 530.

DATES: The meetings are scheduled as

follows:

1. January 27, 9 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.,

Phoenix, Arizona, Region 5 Advisory

Board.

2. January 31, 9 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.,

Miami, Florida, Region 2 Advisory

Board.

ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at

the following locations:

1. Phoenix, Arizona—Holiday Inn

Crowne Plaza Hotel, 111 North Central

Avenue.

2. Miami, Florida—Hyatt Regency

Miami, 400 S.E. 2nd Avenue.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill

Nevius, Committee Management Officer,

Thrift Depositor Protection Oversight

Board, 808 17th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20232, 202/416–2626.

Dated: January 12, 1995.

Jill Nevius,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–1184 Filed 1–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 2221–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory

Committee Meeting on Rotorcraft

Issues

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice announces a

public meeting of the FAA’s Aviation

Rulemaking Advisory Committee on

rotorcraft issues to discuss current

rulemaking actions and future activities

and plans.

DATES: The meeting will be held on

February 2, 1995, at 9 a.m. PST. Arrange

for oral presentations by January 19,

1995.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at

the Convention Center, Room No. N–

224, 3150 Paradise Rd, Las Vegas,

Nevada 89109–9096.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Barbara Herber, Office of

Rulemaking, Aircraft & Airport Rules

Division, AIR–200, 800 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591,

telephone (202) 267–3498.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

referenced meeting is announced

pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the

Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub.

L. 92–463; 5 U.S.C. App. II). The agenda

will include:

• Introduction to the Revision of the

ARAC procedures.

• Report by External Loads Working

Group.

• Critique on NPRM (94–36)

Regarding 14 CFR Parts 27/29.

Harmonization

• Status of Final Occupant Protection

Rule.

• Review New Tasks.

Attendance is open to the interested

public but will be limited to the space

available. The Public must make

arrangements by January 19, 1995, to

present oral statements at the meeting.

Written statements may be presented to

the committee at any time by providing

16 copies to the Assistant Executive

Director or by providing the copies to

him at the meeting. In addition, sign

and oral interpretation, as well as a

listening device, can be made available

at the meeting if requested 10 calendar

days before the meeting. Arrangements

may be made by contacting the person

listed under the heading FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 11,

1995.

Mark Schilling,

Assistant Executive Director for Rotorcraft

Issues, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory

Committee.

[FR Doc. 95–1145 Filed 1–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

RTCA, Inc.; Special Committee 159

Thirty-Third Meeting; Minimum

Operational Performance Standards

for Airborne Navigation Equipment

Using Global Positioning System

(GPS)

Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the

Federal Advisory Committee Act (P.L.

92–463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix I), notice is

hereby given for Special Committee 159

meeting to be held February 6–10, 1995,

starting at 9:00 a.m. The meeting will be

held at the RTCA conference room, 1140

Connecticut Avenue, NW., Suite 1020,

Washington, DC 20036.

Specific Working Groups Sessions

February 6

Working Group 1, GPS/GLONASS

Working Group 5, Fault Detection and

Isolation

Ad Hoc Working Group, Interference

Issues

February 7

Working Group 3, GPS/Other

Navigation Systems

Ad Hoc Working Group Interference

Issues

February 8

Working Group 4, Precision Landing

Guidance and Airport Surface

Surveillance

Working Group 7, Antenna Performance

February 9

Working Group 2, GPS/GIC/WADGNSS

February 10—Agenda—Plenary Session

Agenda will be as follows: (1)

Chairman’s introductory remarks; (2)

Approval of summary of the thirtysecond meeting held on December 9,

1994; (3) Review working group (WG)

progress and identify issues for

resolution: (a) GPS/GLONASS (WG–1)

(b) GPS/GIC/WADGNSS (WG–2) (c)

GPS/Other Navigation Systems (WG–3)

(d) GPS/Precision Landing Guidance

and Airport Surface Surveillance (WG–

4) (e) Fault Detection and Isolation

(WG–5) (f) Interference issues (Ad Hoc)

(g) Antenna Performance (WG–7); (4)

Review of EUROCAE Activities; (5)

WAAS MOPS presentation and review;

(6) Assignment/review of future work;

(7) Other business; (8) Date and place of

next meeting.

Attendance is open to the interested

public but limited to space availability.

With the approval of the Chairman,

members of the public may present oral

statements at the meeting. Persons

wishing to present statements or obtain

information should contact the RTCA

Secretariat, 1140 Connecticut Avenue,

NW., Suite 1020, Washington, DC

20036; (202) 833–9339. Any member of

the public may present a written

statement to the committee at any time.

Issued in Washington, D.C., on January 5,

1995.

David W. Ford,

Designated Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–1146 Filed 1–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

RTCA, Inc.; Special Committee 180

Eighth Meeting; Design Assurance

Guidance for Airborne Electronic

Hardware

Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the

Federal Advisory Committee Act (P.L.

92–463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix I), notice is

hereby given for Special Committee 180

meeting to be held March 21–23, 1995,

starting at 8:30 a.m. on the first day and

8:00 a.m. on subsequent days. The

meeting will be held at EUROCAE, 17

rue Hamelin, Paris, France.