Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 250 / Friday, December 29, 1995 / Notices 67385

9The inclusion of a rule in an exchange’s minor

rule plan should not be interpreted to mean that it

is not an important rule. On the contrary, the

Commission recognizes that the inclusion of minor

violations of particular rules under a minor rule

violation plan may make the exchange’s

disciplinary system more efficient in prosecuting

more egregious and/or repeated violations of these

rules, thereby furthering its mandates to protect

investors and the public interest.

10The MRP permits any person to contest the

Exchange’s imposition of a fine through submission

of a written answer, at which time the matter will

become a formal disciplinary proceeding.

11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

12 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

3Securities Exchange Act Release No. 36378 (Oct.

16, 1995), 60 FR 54401.

4Amendment No. 1 confirmed that the Exchange

has procedures in place that ensure the module

remains current in view of industry changes in the

United States as well as Canada, and it assigned

separate series numbers to the two examinations

contained in the module. See Letter dated

November 1, 1995, from James E. Buck, Senior Vice

President and Secretary, NYSE, to Glen Barrentine,

Team Leader, SEC.

5Amendment No. 2 broadened the scope of the

module slightly by adding some subtopics to it. See

letter dated December 15, 1995, from James E. Buck,

Senior Vice President and Secretary, NYSE, to Glen

Barrentine, Team Leader, SEC.

6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) and 78f(c)(3)(B).

7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

given the nature of the violation. 9 PSE

Rule 10.13 provides for an appropriate

response to minor violations of certain

Exchange rules while preserving the due

process rights of the party accused

through specified required

procedures. 10

Moreover, the Commission finds that

violations of the provisions being added

to the MRP are objective and technical

in nature, and easily verifiable, thereby

lending themselves to the use of

expedited proceedings. Noncompliance

with the provisions may be determined

objectively and adjudicated quickly

without the complicated factual and

interpretive inquiries associated with

more sophisticated Exchange

disciplinary proceedings. If, however,

the Exchange determines that a

violation of one of these rules is not

minor in nature, the Exchange retains

the discretion to initiate full

disciplinary proceedings in accordance

with Exchange Rule 10.3.

The Commission also believes that the

establishment of an administrative

charge for the late filing of periodic

FOCUS Reports is consistent with

Section 6(b)(1) of the Act in that it will

enhance the Exchange’s ability to

enforce compliance with Rule 17a-5

under the Act and the rules of the

Exchange by providing the PSE with a

standardized response to such instances

and members with a clear incentive to

file their periodic FOCUS Reports on a

timely basis.

Finally, the Commission finds that,

consistent with Section 6(b)(6), the

imposition of both the recommended

fines for the above-listed additions to

the MRP and an administrative charge

for the late filing of periodic FOCUS

Reports should result in appropriate

discipline of members, in a manner that

is proportionate to the nature of such

violations. The Commission, however,

expects the PSE to bring full

disciplinary proceedings in appropriate

cases involving the additions to the

MRP and the late filing of periodic

FOCUS Reports (e.g., in cases where the

violation is egregious or where there is

a history or pattern of repeated

violations).

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,11 that the

proposed rule change (SR–PSE–95–27)

is approved.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority. 12

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–31507 Filed 12–28–95;8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Release No. 34–36629; International Series

Release No. 909; File No. SR–NYSE–95–29]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New

York Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order

Granting Approval to Proposed Rule

Change and Notice of Filing and Order

Granting Accelerated Approval of

Amendments No. 1 and 2 Relating to

the Specifications and Content Outline

for the Canadian Module of the General

Securities Registered Representative

Examination (Series 37 and Series 38)

December 21, 1995.

I. Introduction

On September 18, 1995, the New York

Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘NYSE’’ or

‘‘Exchange’’) submitted to the Securities

and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or

‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section

19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act

of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4

thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to

adopt a Canadian module of the General

Securities Registered Representative

Examination.

The proposed rule change was

published for comment in the Federal

Register on October 23, 1995.3 No

comments were received on the

proposal. Amendment No. 1 4 was filed

on November 2, 1995. Amendment No.

2 5 was filed on December 19, 1995. This

order approves the proposal, including

Amendments No. 1 and 2 on an

accelerated basis.

II. Description of the Proposal

Presently, registered representatives

who are already qualified to conduct

business in Canada and who wish to sell

securities in the United States must

qualify as registered representatives in

the U.S. by successfully completing the

General Securities Registered

Representative Examination (Series 7).

In an effort to reduce redundant

qualification requirements, the

Exchange has developed a Canadian

module of the Series 7 which consists

of two examinations, the Series 37 and

the Series 38. As a subset of the Series

7, these examinations cover subject

matter that is not covered, or is not

covered in sufficient detail, on the

Canadian qualification examinations.

The Series 37 is for Canadian registered

representatives who hold the additional

Canadian license to sell options. This

examination contains only 45 questions

because it excludes questions pertaining

to options. All other Canadian registered

representatives must pass the Series 38.

This is a 90 question examination that

includes questions concerning options.

To become registered with the

Exchange, qualified Canadian registered

representatives in good standing with

the Canadian securities authorities

would be required to obtain a passing

score on one of the two examinations

contained in the Canadian module.

Canadian representatives seeking to sell

municipal securities, however, would

be required to pass either the standard

Series 7 or a combination of the

applicable Canadian module

examination and the Series 52

(Municipal Securities Representative

Examination).

III. Discussion

After careful review, the Commission

finds that the proposed rule change is

consistent with the requirements of the

Act and the rules and regulations

thereunder applicable to a national

securities exchange, and, in particular,

with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5)

and Section 6(c)(3)(B).6

The Commission believes the

proposal is consistent with Section

6(b)(5)7 because it is designed to perfect

the mechanism of a free and open

market. The Canadian module of the

series 7 reduces duplicative

qualification requirements and, at the

same time, allows the Exchange to

ensure that the Canadian representatives

wishing to become registered with the

Exchange are fully qualified. In

addition, U.S. representatives currently

receive substantially reciprocal
67386 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 250 / Friday, December 29, 1995 / Notices

8The Canadian Securities Institute, in

conjunction with the Investment Dealers

Association of Canada, developed the New Entrants

Exam. The New Entrants Exam is a shortened

examination module for U.S. qualified registered

representatives seeking to conduct business with

Canadian citizens.

9 15 U.S.C. 78f(c)(3)(B).

10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

1See Letter from Claudia Crowley, Special

Counsel, Amex, to Glen Barrentine, Team Leader,

Division of Market Regulation, SEC, dated

December 14, 1995. Amendment No. 1 clarifies that

the Exchange is filing its proposed rule change

pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e)(6) as a ‘‘noncontroversial’’ rule change and makes appropriate

changes to the Form 19b–4. See infra note 3 for

further description of Amendment No. 1.

treatment from the Canadian securities

authorities, thus easing their access to

the Canadian market.8

The Commission also believes the

proposal is consistent with Section

6(c)(3)(B)9 because it establishes

standards of training, experience, and

competence for persons associated with

Exchange members and member

organizations. The Canadian module

should provide comprehensive coverage

of the topics contained in the Series 7

that are not covered, or are not covered

in sufficient detail, in the Canadian

qualification examinations.

Accordingly, the Canadian module,

along with the Canadian qualification

examinations, should adequately

measure the Canadian representatives’

knowledge of U.S. securities laws,

markets, investment products, and sales

practices.

The Commission finds good cause for

approving proposed Amendments No. 1

and 2 prior to the thirtieth day after the

date of publication of notice of filing

thereof in the Federal Register.

Amendment No. 1 confirmed that the

Exchange has procedures in place that

ensure the module remains current in

view of industry changes in the United

States as well as Canada, and it assigned

separate series numbers to the two

examinations contained in the module.

Amendment No. 2 broadened the scope

of the Canadian module slightly to

ensure that it is sufficient to measure

Canadian registered representatives’

knowledge of U.S. securities laws,

markets, investment products, and sales

practices. Although Amendment No. 2

added a few subtopics, the general

scope of the module did not change. For

these reasons, the Commission finds

good cause for accelerating approval of

Amendments No. 1 and 2.

Interested persons are invited to

submit written data, views, and

arguments concerning Amendments No.

1 and 2 to the proposed rule change.

Persons making written submissions

should file six copies thereof with the

Secretary, Securities and Exchange

Commission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20549. 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

Amendments No. 1 and 2 between the

Commission and any persons, 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

Section, 450 Fifth street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of such

filing also will be available at the

principal office of the NYSE. All

submissions should refer to File No.

SR–NYSE–95–29 and should be

submitted by January 19, 1996.

IV. Conclusion

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,10 that the

proposed rule change (SR–NYSE–95–

29), including Amendments No. 1 and

2 on an accelerated basis, is approved.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.11

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–31508 Filed 12–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Release No. 34–36633; File No. SR–Amex–

95–51]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness

of Proposed Rule Change by the

American Stock Exchange, Inc.

Relating to the Use of Automated

Telephone Voting Systems by Member

Organizations or Their Proxy Agents

December 22, 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 December 13, 1995,

the American Stock Exchange, Inc.

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

Securities and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule

change as described in Items I, II, and

III below, which Items have been

prepared by the self-regulatory

organization. On December 15, 1995, the

Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1

to the proposed rule change.1 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 Exchange is proposing to amend

Rule 577 and Section 723 of the

Company Guide to permit the use of

automated telephone voting systems by

member organizations or their proxy

agents.

The proposed rule change would

amend Amex Rule 577 and Section 723

of the Amex Company Guide by adding

the following text:

Instructions from beneficial owners may

also be accepted by member organizations or

their agents through the use of an automated

telephone voting system which has been

approved by the Exchange. Such a system

shall utilize an identification code for

beneficial owners and provide an

opportunity for beneficial owners to validate

votes to ensure that they were received

correctly. The automated system must

provide beneficial owners with the same

power and authority to issue, revoke, or

otherwise change voting instructions as

currently exists for instructions

communicated in written form. Records of

voting including the date of receipt of

instructions and the name of the recipient

must be retained by the member

organizations or their agents.

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 an

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.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

1. Purpose

Exchange Rules 575 through 585

specify the manner in which an

Exchange member organization must

transmit proxy materials to customers

who are the beneficial owners of

securities held of record by the member

organization. The voting process which

is currently used by member

organizations (or their proxy agents)

provides for the transmission of a proxy

statement and voting authorization form

to beneficial owners. The appropriate

voting selections are indicated on the

form by the beneficial owner and mailed