Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 46 / Thursday, March 9, 1995 / Notices 12991

the above-mentioned procedures to

ensure their familiarity with respect to

the removal of fuses during hot

shutdown. Therefore, operators are

trained and experienced in removing

the fuses.

On the basis of this evaluation, the

Commission concludes that the

proposed action to close the PORV

block valves prior to control room

evacuation and to remove fuses from the

PORV control circuit provides

reasonable assurance that safe shutdown

can be achieved in the event of a control

room fire and is acceptable.

III

The Commission has determined,

pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50.12, that this

exemption as described in Section II

above is authorized by law, will not

present an undue risk to the public

health and safety, and is consistent with

the common defense and security.

Furthermore, the Commission has

determined that special circumstances

as provided in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), are

present in that application of the

regulation, as interpreted by the staff, in

the particular circumstances is not

necessary to achieve the underlying

purpose of the rule. The underlying

purpose of Section III.G.1 of Appendix

R is to ensure that safe shutdown can be

achieved notwithstanding a fire or the

consequences therefrom. Application of

this section to the extent it precludes

the removal of fuses as a fire protection

feature is not necessary to achieve the

underlying purpose of the rule because

the licensee’s proposal still provides

reasonable assurance that one safe

shutdown train will be operable and

free of fire damage.

IV

Accordingly, the Commission hereby

grants an exemption from the

requirements of Section III.G.1 of

Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50 to allow

removal of fuses from the PORV control

circuit in the event of a control room

fire.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the

Commission has determined that the

granting of this exemption will have no

significant impact on the quality of the

human environment (59 FR 62415).

This exemption is effective upon

issuance.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day

of February 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John N. Hannon,

Acting Director, Division of Reactor Projects—

III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95–5773 Filed 3–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

POSTAL RATE COMMISSION

Notice of Commission Visits

March 3, 1995.

Notice is hereby given that members

of the Postal Rate Commission and

certain advisory staff members will visit

the facilities of the following businesses

to observe their operations:

Penton Press, Cleveland, Ohio and then

meet with officials from Lands End,

Inc. in Milwaukee, Wisconsin on

March 7, 1995.

Quad/Graphics, Hartford, Wisconsin on

March 8, 1995.

Hallmark Cards, Kansas City, Missouri,

March 9, 1995.

Reports of these visits will be placed

on file in the Commission’s Docket

Room. For further information contact

Margaret P. Crenshaw, Secretary of the

Commission at 202–789–6840.

Margaret P. Crenshaw,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5813 Filed 3–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

Agency Forms Submitted for OMB

Review

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44

U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Railroad

Retirement Board has submitted the

following proposal(s) for the collection

of information to the Office of

Management and Budget for review and

approval.

Summary of Proposal(s):

(1) Collection title: Placement Service.

(2) Form(s) submitted: ES–2, ES–20a,

ES–20b, ES–21, ES–21c, UI–35.

(3) OMB Number: 3220–0057.

(4) Expiration date of current OMB

clearance: April 30, 1995.

(5) Type of request: Revision of a

currently approved collection.

(6) Respondents: Individuals or

households, Business or other for-profit,

State, Local or Tribal Government.

(7) Estimated annual number of

respondents: 27,700.

(8) Total annual responses: 31,250.

(9) Total annual reporting hours:

1,981.

(10) Collection description: Under the

RUIA, the Railroad Retirement Board

provides job placement assistance for

unemployed railroad workers. The

collection obtains information from job

applicants, railroad and non-railroad

employers, and State Employment

Service offices for use in placement, for

providing referrals for job openings and

reports of referral results and for

verifying and monitoring claimant

eligibility.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS:

Copies of the form and supporting

documents can be obtained from Chuck

Mierzwa, the agency clearance officer

(312–751–3363). Comments regarding

the information collection should be

addressed to Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad

Retirement Board, 844 North Rush

Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611–2092 and

the OMB reviewer, Laura Oliven (202–

395–7316), Office of Management and

Budget, Room 10230, New Executive

Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.

Chuck Mierzwa,

Clearance Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–5767 Filed 3–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7905–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 34–35437; File No. SR–CBOE–

95–14]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by

the Chicago Board Options Exchange,

Inc. Relating to Buy-Write Options

Unitary Derivatives

March 2, 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 February 1, 1995,

the Chicago Board Options Exchange,

Inc. (‘‘CBOE’’ 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 selfregulatory 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 Exchange, pursuant to Rule 19b–

4 under the Act, proposes to amend its

rules to permit trading in Buy-Write

Options Unitary Derivatives

(‘‘BOUNDs’’). As described in more

detail below, BOUNDs are long term

options which the CBOE believes have

the same economic characteristics as a

covered call writing strategy.

The text of the proposed rule change

is available at the Office of the

Secretary, CBOE and at the Commission.
12992 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 46 / Thursday, March 9, 1995 / Notices

1A European-style option may only be exercised

during a limited period of time before the option

expires. An American-style option may be exercised

at any time prior to its expiration.

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.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule

Change

The CBOE believes the purchase of a

BOUND will be substantially equivalent

to a ‘‘buy-write’’ transaction (i.e., the

simultaneous writing of a call option

and purchase of the underlying stock).

Unlike an actual buy-write transaction,

however, the purchase of a BOUND is

effected in a single exchange

transaction. The Options Clearing

Corporation (‘‘OCC’’) will be the issuer

of all BOUNDs traded on the Exchange.

As with OCC issued options, BOUNDs

will be created when an opening buy

and an opening sell order are executed.

The execution of every such order will

increase BOUNDs open interest. Except

as described herein, BOUNDs will be

subject to the rules governing

standardized options.

A BOUND holder will be in

essentially the same economic position

as a covered call writer except that a

BOUND is not subject to exercise before

expiration. BOUND holders will profit

from the stock’s movement up to the

strike price and will receive payments

equivalent to the cash dividends paid

on the underlying stocks. On the ex-date

for a stock dividend, OCC will debit all

short BOUND accounts and credit all

long BOUND accounts with an amount

equal to the dividend on the underlying

stock.

Like put and call options, BOUNDS

will trade in standardized contract units

of 100 shares of underlying stock per

BOUND contract. At expiration, BOUND

holders will receive 100 shares of the

underlying stock for each BOUND

contract held if on the last day of

trading, the underlying stock closes at or

below the strike price. However, if at

expiration the underlying stock closes

above the strike price, the BOUND

holder will receive a payment equal to

100 times the BOUND’s strike price for

each BOUND contract held. Persons

who have sold BOUND contracts will be

required to deliver either 100 shares of

the underlying stock for each BOUND

contract or the strike price multiplied by

100 at expiration, depending on the

price of the underlying stock at that

time. This is the same economic result

that accrues to a covered call writer who

holds the position to the expiration of

the call option.

For example, if the XYZ BOUND has

a strike price of $50 and XYZ stock

closes at $50 or less at expiration, the

holder of an XYZ BOUND contract will

receive 100 shares of XYZ stock. This is

the same result as if the call option in

a buy-write position had expired out of

the money; i.e., the option would expire

worthless and the writer would retain

the underlying stock. If XYZ closes

above $50 per share, then the holder of

an XYZ BOUND contract will receive

$5,000 in cash (100 times the $50 strike

price). This mimics the economic result

to the covered call writer when the call

is in the money at expiration and is

exercised, i.e., the writer would receive

an amount equal to 100 shares times the

strike price and, because he would be

required to deliver the stock, would

forfeit any appreciation above that price.

The criteria for stocks underlying

BOUNDs will be the same as the criteria

for stocks underlying stock options. The

Exchange anticipates that it will list

BOUNDs on the same underlying

securities on which Long-Term Equity

Option Series (‘‘LEAPs’’) are listed.

BOUNDs will be listed at the same

strike prices and expiration dates as

their respective LEAPs except that

BOUNDs will be listed only at strike

prices that are at (or very near) or below

the then current price of the underlying

stock. BOUNDs will be listed with up to

39 months until expiration.

It is anticipated that the sum of the

market prices of a LEAP and a BOUND

on the same underlying stock with the

same expiration date and exercise price

will approximate the market price of the

underlying stock. If the combined price

of the LEAP and BOUND diverge from

that of the underlying stock, it is

anticipated that arbitrage activity will

tend to bring the price relationships

back into line.

There is also a relationship between

the settlement at expiration of a LEAP

and a BOUND having the same

underlying security, strike price and

expiration date. If at expiration the

underlying stock closes at or below the

strike price, the LEAP call will expire

worthless, and the holder of a BOUND

contract will receive 100 shares of stock

from the seller of a BOUND position. if,

on the other hand, the LEAP call is in

the money at expiration, the holder of

the LEAP call is entitled to 100 shares

of stock from a short LEAP upon

payment of the strike price, and the

holder of a BOUND contract is entitled

to the strike price times 100 in cash

from the short BOUND. While it seems

unlikely that an investor would be long

both a LEAP and a BOUND at

expiration, it is illustrative to consider

how such a position would be settled.

To continue with the above example

where XYZ closes above the $50 strike

price at expiration, an investor long

both a LEAP and a BOUND contract

would be entitled to receive $5,000 in

cash from the short BOUND and, upon

exercise of the LEAP, would be

obligated to pay $5,000 to receive 100

shares of XYZ stock.

The settlement of the LEAP and

BOUND at expiration are equally well

harmonized from the perspective of the

writer. For example, if a writer of both

instruments is covered with the

underlying stock and the stock closes

above the strike price, at expiration, the

writer delivers the stock to the long

LEAP call and receives in return

payment of the strike price times 100,

which amount is then delivered to the

long BOUND. A covered writer’s

position, therefore, effectively is closed

upon the delivery of the covering stock.

If a writer of both instruments has

deposited cash or securities other than

the underlying stock as margin for a

short LEAP call and BOUND, then the

writer delivers 100 shares of stock

(purchased on the open market) to the

long LEAP call upon payment of the

strike price times 100. The writer of the

BOUND then delivers 100 times the

strike price to the holder of the long

BOUND.

It should be noted that LEAPs are

American-style options whereas

BOUNDs are European-style in that they

cannot be ‘‘exercised’’ prior to

expiration.1 The Exchange believes that

a European-style BOUND will have

greater acceptance among investors than

an American-style product since a

European-style BOUND will permit

purchasers to enjoy the enhanced yield

that the BOUND provides for a certain

period of time. Furthermore, because

some type of performance—either

delivery of the underlying stock or

payment of the strike price—is always

required at expiration, the CBOE

believes that notice of exercise is not

necessary and, therefore, will not be

required.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 46 / Thursday, March 9, 1995 / Notices 12993

Customer Margin. The Exchange

proposes to apply options margin

treatment to BOUNDs as explained

below.

A. Long BOUND Positions

Long BOUND positions will be given

no loan value and payment in full will

be required at the time of purchase. As

described more fully below, however,

there will be a credit for long BOUNDs

in BOUND spread positions.

B. Short BOUND Positions

The BOUND seller receives the full

value of the BOUND at the time of the

initial sale and receives no further

payment when the contract is settled

either by payment of the strike price or

delivery of the underlying stock. Short

BOUND positions, therefore, will be

margined in an amount equal to the

current market price of the BOUND plus

an amount equal to the ‘‘add on’’

percentage used to margin short call

options times the market value of the

BOUND. Since the maximum obligation

of the seller of a BOUND cannot exceed

the strike price, however, the amount of

margin will never exceed the strike

value. Examples of the margin treatment

for a short BOUND position follow:

1. Assume a stock price of $50, a

margin add-on percent of 20% and the

BOUND trading at $40. In this case, the

short seller would have to pay $48 to

margin the position, i.e., $40 BOUND

price plus 20% of $40 ($8), or $48.

2. Assume a stock price of $60, an

exercise price of $50, a margin add-on

of 20% and the BOUND trading at $45.

In this case, the calculated margin

would be $54, i.e., $45 BOUND price

plus 20% of $45 ($9) or $54. However,

since the maximum margin for a short

BOUND is the strike value, the margin

would be $50.

3. Assume a stock price of $40, an

exercise price of $50, a margin add-on

percent of 20% and the BOUND trading

at $35. In this case, the margin would

be $42, i.e., $35 BOUND price plus 20%

of $35 ($7), or $42.

C. Covered Positions

Short BOUND positions offset by the

equivalent number of shares of the

underlying stock will not require any

additional margin since the seller’s

obligation to the buyer will, in all cases,

be covered by the position in the

underlying stock. Further, since the sum

of the prices of a LEAP and a BOUND

will be approximately equal to the price

of the underlying stock, a long stock

position is cover for both a short

BOUND and a short LEAP position.

D. Spread Positions

Same Expiration—Different Strike

Prices

There will be no margin requirement

for BOUND positions which are long the

higher strike price and short the lower

strike price since the long BOUND more

than covers the obligation of the short

side of the position. For positions short

the higher strike price and long the

lower strike, a customer will be required

to post the difference between the strike

prices.

Different Expiration—Same Strike Price

No margin will be required for

positions long the nearest expiration

and short the longer expiration since the

value of the long BOUND will cover the

obligation on the short leg of the

position. Positions that are short the

near expiration and long the distant

expiration will require full margin on

the short position less 80% of the

market value of the long position.

Different Expiration—Different Strike

Prices

There will be no margin required for

positions that are long the near

expiration and short the distant

expiration when the strike price on the

near expiration is higher than the strike

on the distant expiration. For positions

which are long the near expiration and

short the distant expiration when the

strike price on the near expiration is

lower than the strike on the distant

contract, the margin will be the

difference in the strike between the near

term and distant strikes. For positions

which are short the near expiration and

long the distant expiration, full margin

will be required on the short position

less 80% of the market value of the long

position.

Sales Practices

BOUNDs will be subject to the sales

practice and suitability rules applicable

to standardized options.

Adjustments for Corporate Transactions

BOUNDs will be subject to

adjustments for corporate and other

actions in accordance with the rules of

The Options Clearing Corporation.

Positions Limits

BOUNDS will be subject to the

position limits for equity options set

forth in Exchange Rule 4.11. In addition,

BOUNDs will be aggregated with equity

options on the same underlying stock

for the purpose of calculating position

limits. However, since BOUND, to the

holder, is a ‘‘bullish’’ position (i.e., it is

the equivalent of a short put position

where the strike price has been

prepaid), long BOUNDS will be

aggregated with long call and short put

positions. Similarly, since the BOUND,

to the seller, is a ‘‘bearish’’ position (i.e.,

it is the equivalent of a long put position

where the strike price has been

prepaid), short BOUNDS will be

aggregated with short call and long put

positions.

The CBOE believes the proposed rule

change is consistent with Section 6(b) of

the Act in general and furthers the

objectives of Section 9(b)(5) in

particular in that it is designed to

prevent fraudulent and manipulative

acts and practices, to promote just and

equitable principles of trade, to foster

cooperation and coordination with

persons engaged in facilitating

transactions in securities, to remove

impediments to and perfect the

mechanism of a free and open market

and a national market system, and to

protect investors and the public interest.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Burden on Competition

The Exchange does not believe that

the proposed rule change will impose

any burden on competition.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Comments on the

Proposed Rule Change Received From

Members, Participants or Others

Comments were neither solicited nor

received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for

Commission Action

Within 35 days of the publication of

this notice in the Federal Register or

within such other period (i) as the

Commission may designate up to 90

days of such date if it finds such longer

period to be appropriate and publishes

its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to

which the self-regulatory organization

consents, the Commission will:

(A) By order approve the proposed

rule change, or

(B) Institute proceedings to determine

whether the proposed rule change

should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited to

submit written data, views and

arguments concerning the foregoing.

Persons making written submissions

should file six copies thereof with the

Secretary, Securities and Exchange

Commission, 450 Fifth Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of the

submission, all subsequent

amendments, all written statements

with respect to the proposed rule
12994 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 46 / Thursday, March 9, 1995 / Notices

2 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) (1994).

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

2Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35284

(January 27, 1995), 60 FR 6582.

3The computer facilities that support the

provision of NWII are operated by the Nasdaq Stock

Market, Inc. (‘‘NSMI’’), a wholly-owned subsidiary

of the NASD.

4See Release No. 34–35189 (January 3, 1995), 60

FR 3014 (January 12, 1995).

5The NWII roll-out will occur in five phases with

the final phase scheduled for completion in mid1996. Each phase consists of installing NWII at all

subscriber sites in a defined geographic area. Thus,

while the roll-out proceeds, some subscribers will

continue to utilize NWI and will pay the existing

charges for that service.

6NWI and NWII both permit the delivery of either

Level 2 or Level 3 Nasdaq service. Subscription to

Level 3 is limited to NASD members that meet the

financial and operational requirements for market

making. Subscription to Level 2 Nasdaq service is

open to non-members as well as members because

it does not provide the functionality needed to enter

quotations as a market maker.

7 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

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

2The NASD originally submitted the proposed

rule change on November 21, 1994. On December

1, 1994 and January 12, 1995, the NASD filed

amendments to its filing.

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 at

the Commission’s Public Reference

Section, 450 Fifth Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of such

filing will also be available for

inspection and copying at the principal

office of the CBOE. All submissions

should refer to the file number in the

caption above and should be submitted

by March 30, 1995.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.2

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5702 Filed 3–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Release No. 34–35438; File No. SR–NASD–

95–01]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Order

Approving Proposed Rule Change by

the National Association of Securities

Dealers, Inc. Relating to Subscriber

Fees For Non-NASD Members

Receiving the Nasdaq Workstation TM II

Functionality

March 2, 1995.

On January 9, 1995, the National

Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.

(‘‘NASD’’ or ‘‘Association’’) filed with

the Securities and Exchange

Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’),

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

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Act’’),1 a proposed rule change to

extend to non-NASD members (e.g.,

institutional investors) receiving the

second generation of Nasdaq

WorkstationTM functionality (‘‘NWII’’)

the same subscriber fees that members

must now pay. The Commission

published notice of the proposed rule

change in the Federal Register on

February 2, 1995.2 No comments were

received in response to the notice. For

the reason discussed below, the

Commission is approving the proposed

rule change.

I. The Terms of Substance of the

Proposed Rule Change

On December 14, 1994, the NASD

submitted a proposed rule change—File

No. SR–NASD–94–76—to the

Commission that established a new fee

schedule for NASD member firms

receiving the second generation of

NWII.3 The fee schedule contained in

File No. SR–NASD–94–76 became

effective upon receipt by the SEC in

accordance with Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii)

of the Act and Rule 19b–4(a)

thereunder.4 As specified in File No.

SR–NASD–94–76, the new subscriber

fees for NWII will add to Sections A(9)

and E(5) of Part VIII of Schedule D to

the NASD By-Laws.

The NASD then filed the instant rule

change to extend to non-NASD members

(e.g., institutional investors) receiving

NWII functionality the same subscriber

fees that members must now pay: (a) a

service charge of $100/month per server;

(b) a display charge of $500/month per

presentation device; and (c) a charge of

$1,150/month for additional circuits.

This rule change does not, however,

entail any further modification to the fee

schedule language for NWII that was set

forth in File No. SR–NASD–94–76.

The sole purpose of this rule change

is to extend to non-NASD members

receiving the NWII, the same fees that

now apply to NASD members that

subscribe to the NWII. Currently, nonNASD members can access Level 2

Nasdaq Workstation service by

subscription to the original version of

the Nasdaq Workstation service

(‘‘NWI’’). The NASD, however, is in the

process of replacing NWI with NWII.5

As the NWII roll-out proceeds, it will

completely replace the existing NWI for

all classes of subscribers. The instant

rule change will ensure that the same

NWII charges are paid by all

subscribers, including those that are not

members of the NASD.

II. Commission Findings

The Commission believes that the rule

change is consistent with the

requirements of Section 15A(b)(5) of the

Act. Section 15A(b)(5) specifies that the

rules of a national securities association

shall provide for the equitable allocation

of reasonable dues, fees, and other

changes among members, issuers, and

other persons using any facility or

system that the Association operates or

controls. This rule provides that the

newly established fees for members

receiving the NWII functionality will

also be paid by non-member subscribers

receiving the NWII.6 This, in turn,

effectuates fairness in the recovery of

the applicable costs from the entire

subscriber base. As described in this

notice, NWII is being implemented in

phases with all current NWI subscribers

in a defined area being converted to

NWII. Also non-NASD members that are

converted to NWII will be liable for the

new fees; NWI subscribers (i.e.,

members and non-members) will

continue to pay the NWI service fees

until they are converted. The extension

of the new NWII fees schedule to nonmembers will result in the imposition of

uniform fees and an equitable allocation

of operating costs among all subscribers

receiving the NWII functionality.

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to

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

proposed rule change SR–NASD–95–01

be, and hereby is, approved.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.7

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5701 Filed 3–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Release No. 34–35435 File No. SR–NASD–

94–61]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Order

Approving Proposed Rule Change by

National Association of Securities

Dealers, Inc. Relating to the Filing

Requirements Under Article III, Section

44 of the NASD Rules of Fair Practice

Regarding Modified Guaranteed

Annuity Contracts and Modified

Guaranteed Life Insurance Contracts

March 2, 1995.

On January 12, 1995, the National

Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.

(‘‘NASD’’ or ‘‘Association’’), pursuant to

Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1, filed

with the Securities and Exchange

Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’)

a proposed rule change 2 that amends