Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Notices 33987

17The Commission notes that permitting chief

compliance officers to choose between the NYSE’s

Series 14 examination and the NASD’s Series 24

examination also should avoid imposing

duplicative examination requirements on dual

NASD/NYSE members. See Amendment No. 1,

supra note 3.

18See Amendment No. 3, supra note 7.

19 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

20 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

The Commission also finds that

requiring the registration, examination

and continuing education of chief

compliance officers is within NASD

Regulation’s authority to prescribe

standards of training, experience, and

competence for persons associated with

NASD members. Thus, the Commission

finds that it is consistent with the Act

to require that the chief compliance

officer register as a Series 24 General

Securities Principle.17 The Commission

also finds that it is appropriate to permit

chief compliance officers whose

activities are limited to particular areas

of the investment banking or securities

business to register as limited principals

and take the appropriate exam

corresponding to their subject area, if a

corresponding exam exists and NASD

Regulation finds that the exam

adequately demonstrates a chief

compliance officer’s knowledge of the

subject area.18 Therefore, the

Commission finds that it is appropriate

to permit limited principal registration

for chief compliance officers for

members whose business is limited to

Investment Company and Variable

Contracts and Direct Participation

Programs; to delete references to the

Series 73, Government Securities

Principal exam, in the test of the

original proposed rule language, as it

does not exist; and to require that chief

compliance officers for member firms

engaged in options-related business take

the Series 24 exam, rather than the

Series 4, Registered Options Principal

exam. The Commission also finds that

requiring chief compliance officers to

participate in continuing education

helps to ensure that chief compliance

officers remain sufficiently

knowledgeable to advise registered

representatives and other principals on

compliance issues, consistent with the

requirements of the Act.

The Commission finds that the

proposed grandfathering provision is a

reasonable approach to implementing

the new registration requirements, and

notes that all grandfathered chief

compliance officers will be subject to

continuing education requirements. In

addition, by requiring the firms with

whom a grandfathered chief compliance

officer has worked during the

grandfathering period to conduct the

same type of securities business, NASD

Regulation ensures that those chief

compliance officers have had consistent

substantive experience during the

grandfathering period.

The Commission further notes that

the grandfathering provision is effective

on January 1, 2002, the proposed

effective date of the rule change.

Whether NASD Regulation actually

implements the registration

requirements for chief compliance

officers on January 1, 2002 or delays the

implementation for other reasons, the

Commission has determined that the

grandfathering provision for chief

compliance officers for purposes of this

rule will continue to be January 1, 2002.

Thus, only those individuals who have

been a chief compliance officer

continuously from January 1, 2000–

January 1, 2002 and who otherwise meet

the other criteria set forth in this

proposed rule change will be eligible for

the grandfathering provision—

regardless of when NASD Regulation

actually implements the proposed rule

change.

The Commission also finds that

NASD Regulation’s response to the

commenter sufficiently address

concerns relating to the attorney client

privilege. The NASD’s statutory

obligation to ensure compliance with its

rules and the federal securities laws is

mandatory, and the Commission agrees

that member firms are obligated to

cooperate with the NASD in its

investigations and actions to ensure

compliance with the Act and the rules

and regulations thereunder. The

Commission also notes that the NASD

has stated that it will recognize a validly

asserted privilege. Finally, the

Commission believes that member firms

that employ attorneys to serve as both

the chief compliance officers and legal

counsel should be able to provide for

the appropriate separation of these

functions.

V. Accelerated Approval for

Amendment No. 3

The Commission finds good cause for

accelerating approval of Amendment

No. 3 to the proposed rule change prior

to the thirtieth day after publication in

the Federal Register. The Commission

notes that the Amendment provides

useful clarifications to the proposed rule

change. Accordingly, the Commission

finds that good cause exists to accelerate

approval of Amendment No. 3 to the

proposed rule change.

VI. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited to

submit written data, views and

arguments concerning Amendment No.

3, including whether the amendment is

consistent with the Act. Persons making

written submissions should file six

copies thereof with the Secretary,

Securities and Exchange Commission,

450 Fifth Street NW., Washington, DC

20549–0609. Copies of the submission,

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 inspection and copying in

the Commission’s Public Reference

Room. Copies of such filing will also be

available for inspection and copying at

the principal office of the NASD

Regulation. All submissions should

refer to the File No. SR–NASD–99–46,

Amendment No. 3, and should be

submitted by July 17, 2001.

VII. Conclusion

It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to

section 19(b)(2) of the Act,19 that the

proposed rule change (SR–NASD–99–

46), as amended, is approved.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.20

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–15980 Filed 6–25–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Declaration of Disaster #3347; Amendment

#1]

State of Texas

In accordance with a notice received

from the Federal Emergency

Management Agency, dated June 18,

2001, the above-numbered Declaration

is hereby amended to include Grimes

and Harrison Counties in the State of

Texas as disaster areas caused by

Tropical Storm Allison occurring on

June 5, 2001 and continuing.

In addition, applications for economic

injury loans from small businesses

located in Marion and Washington

Counties in the State of Texas; and

Caddo Parish in the State of Louisiana

may be filed until the specified date at

the previously designated location. Any

counties contiguous to the above named

primary counties and not listed here

have been previously declared.

All other information remains the

same, i.e., the deadline for filing

33988 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 / Notices

applications for physical damage is

August 8, 2001, and for loans for

economic injury is March 8, 2002.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program Nos. 59002 and 59008.)

Dated: June 19, 2001.

James E. Rivera,

Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster

Assistance.

[FR Doc. 01–15915 Filed 6–25–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Declaration of Disaster #3345; Amendment

#2]

State of West Virginia

In accordance with a notice received

from the Federal Emergency

Management Agency, dated June 18,

2001, the above-numbered Declaration

is hereby amended to include Preston

County in the State of West Virginia as

a disaster area caused by flooding,

severe storms, and landslides beginning

on May 15, 2001 and continuing.

In addition, applications for economic

injury loans from small businesses

located in Barbour, Monongalia, Tucker

and Taylor Counties in the State of West

Virginia; Garrett County in the State of

Maryland; and Fayette County in the

State of Pennsylvania may be filed until

the specified date at the previously

designated location. Any counties

contiguous to the above named primary

counties and not listed here have been

previously declared.

The economic injury numbers

assigned are 9L9500 for Maryland and

9L9600 for Pennsylvania.

All other information remains the

same, i.e., the deadline for filing

applications for physical damage is

August 2, 2001, and for loans for

economic injury is March 4, 2002.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program Nos. 59002 and 59008.)

Dated: June 19, 2001.

James E. Rivera,

Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster

Assistance.

[FR Doc. 01–15914 Filed 6–25–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 3707]

Bureau of Nonproliferation; Imposition

of Nonproliferation Measures Against a

Chinese Entity, Including Ban on U.S.

Government Procurement

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: A determination has been

made that a Chinese entity has engaged

in activities that require the imposition

of measures pursuant to Section 3 of the

Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 14, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: On

general issues: Vann H. Van Diepen,

Office of Chemical, Biological and

Missile Nonproliferation, Bureau of

Nonproliferation, Department of State,

(202–647–1142). On U.S. Government

procurement ban issues: Gladys Gines,

Office of the Procurement Executive,

Department of State, (703–516–1691).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to sections 2 and 3 of the Iran

Nonproliferation Act of 2000 (P.L. 106–

178), the U.S. Government determined

on June 11, 2001, that the measures

authorized in section 3 of the Act shall

apply to the following foreign entity

identified in the report submitted

pursuant to section 2(a) of the Act:

Jiangsu Yongli Chemicals and

Technology Import and Export

Corporation (China) and any successor,

sub-unit, or subsidiary thereof.

Accordingly, pursuant to the

provisions of the Act, the following

measures are imposed on this entity:

1. No department or agency of the

United States Government may procure,

or enter into any contract for the

procurement of, any goods, technology,

or services from the foreign person.

2. No department or agency of the

United States Government may provide

any assistance to the foreign person, and

that person shall not be eligible to

participate in any assistance program of

the United States Government;

3. No United States Government sales

to the foreign person of any item on the

United States Munitions List (as in

effect on August 8, 1995) are permitted,

and all sales to that person of any

defense articles, defense services, or

design and construction services under

the Arms Export Control Act are

terminated; and,

4. No new individual licenses shall be

granted for the transfer to the foreign

person of items, the export of which is

controlled under the Export

Administration Act of 1979 or the

Export Administration Regulations, and

any existing such licenses are

suspended.

These measures shall be implemented

by the responsible departments and

agencies of the United States

Government and will remain in place

for two years, except to the extent that

the Secretary of State may subsequently

determine otherwise. A new

determination will be made in the event

that circumstances change in such a

manner as to warrant a change in the

duration of sanctions.

Dated: June 18, 2001.

Robert J. Einhorn,

Assistant Secretary of State for

Nonproliferation, U.S. Department of State.

[FR Doc. 01–16009 Filed 6–25–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–25–P

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 3708]

Bureau of Nonproliferation; Imposition

of Nonproliferation Measures Against a

North Korean Entity, Including Ban on

U.S. Government Procurement

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: A determination has been

made that a North Korean entity has

engaged in activities that require the

imposition of measures pursuant to

Section 3 of the Iran Nonproliferation

Act of 2000.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 14, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: On

general issues: Vann H. Van Diepen,

Office of Chemical, Biological and

Missile Nonproliferation, Bureau of

Nonproliferation, Department of State,

(202–647–1142). On U.S. Government

procurement ban issues: Gladys Gines,

Office of the Procurement Executive,

Department of State, (703–516–1691).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to sections 2 and 3 of the Iran

Nonproliferation Act of 2000 (P.L. 106–

178), the U.S. Government determined

on June 11, 2001, that the measures

authorized in section 3 of the Act shall

apply to the following foreign entity

identified in the report submitted

pursuant to section 2(a) of the Act:

Changgwang Sinyong Corporation

(North Korea) and any successor, subunit, or subsidiary thereof.

Accordingly, pursuant to the

provisions of the Act, the following

measures are imposed on this entity:

1. No department or agency of the

United States Government may procure,

or enter into any contract for the

procurement of, any goods, technology,

or services from the foreign person;

2. No department or agency of the

United States Government may provide

any assistance to the foreign person, and

that person shall not be eligible to

participate in any assistance program of

the United States Government;

3. No United States Government sales

to the foreign person of any item on the

United States Munitions List (as in