13744 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Notices

4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i) (1988).

5 17 CFR 240.19b–4(e)(1) (1994).

6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) (1994).

1 In addition, the NASD filed Amendment No. 1

on January 11, 1995, to clarify who must report to

the NASD, what the entities must report, and the

mechanics of how to transmit such report. Because

the Amendment did not substantively change the

proposal, the Commission did not publish it for

comment. See letter from Joan C. Conley, Secretary,

NASD, to Mark Barracca, Attorney, SEC, dated

January 11, 1995.

2 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) (1988).

3 17 CFR 240.19b–4 (1991).

4 ‘‘Short’’ positions to be reported are those

resulting from ‘‘short’’ sales as defined in SEC Rule

3b–3, but excludes positions resulting from sales

specified in clauses (1), (6), (7), (8), (9) and (10) of

paragraph (e) of SEC Rule 10a–1. Also to be

excluded are ‘‘short’’ positions carried for other

members and member organizations reporting for

themselves.

MMI programs because MMIs are

processed differently as discussed more

fully below.

DTC sweeps maturing MMIs from the

accounts of ‘‘presenting participants’’

and initiates book-entry deliveries

versus payment to paying agents’

accounts on maturity date for inclusion

in that day’s same-day settlement

system net settlement. Paying agents can

refuse to accept maturity presentments

of an issuer’s MMIs so long as the

paying agents notify DTC of their

intention by 3:00 p.m. Eastern Standard

Time on the day the MMI matures. If a

paying agent refuses to accept maturity

presentments, DTC will communicate

this to all DTC participants and will

reverse the maturity presentments by

recrediting the participants’ accounts

with the maturing MMI, thus offsetting

settlement credits in those accounts.

DTC also will unwind any other

maturity presentments, valued issuance,

periodic income payments (e.g., interest

or dividend), principal presentments,

and reorganization presentments that it

may have processed earlier that day in

the same and other MMIs of a

‘‘defaulting issuer.’’

DTC believes that the proposed rule

change is consistent with the

requirements of Section 17A of the Act

and the rules and regulations

thereunder applicable to DTC because

the proposal will improve the timeliness

of dividend and redemption payments

to DTC participants and will improve

the processing and recordkeeping in the

Dividends and Reorganization

Departments of DTC and its

participants. The proposed rule change

also will improve the procedures for

safeguarding funds in DTC’s custody or

control of for which it is responsible.

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Burden on Competition

DTC does not believe that the

proposed rule change will impose any

burden on competition not necessary or

appropriate in furtherance of the

purposes of the Act.

(C) Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Comments on the

Proposed Rule Change Received from

Members, Participants or Others

Written comments from DTC

participants or others have not been

solicited or received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for

Commission Action

The foregone rule change has become

effective pursuant to Section

19(b)(3)(A)(i) 4 of the Act and Rule 19b4(e)(1)5 promulgated thereunder

because it constitutes a state policy,

practice, or interpretation with respect

to the meaning, administration, or

enforcement of DTC’s existing

procedures for the payment of

dividends, interest, and redemption

proceeds. At any time within sixty days

of the filing of this proposed rule

change, the Commission summarily may

abrogate the rule change if it appears to

the Commission that such action is

necessary or appropriate in the public

interests, for the protection of investors,

or otherwise in furtherance of the

proposed of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited to

submit written data, views, and

arguments concerning the foregoing.

Persons making written submission

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 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

Section, 450 Fifth Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of such

filing will also be available for

inspection at DTC. All submissions

should refer to File No. SR–DTC–95–03

and should be submitted by April 13,

1995.

For the Commission by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to the delegated

authority.6

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–6214 Filed 3–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Release No. 34–35450; File Nos. SR–NYSE–

94–39; SR–Phlx–94–29; SR–PSE–94–34;

SR–BSE–94–15; SR–CHX–94–28; SR–

NASD–94–67; SR–CBOE–94–55]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New

York Stock Exchange, Inc.,

Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.,

Pacific Stock Exchange, Inc., Boston

Stock Exchange, Inc., Chicago Stock

Exchange, Inc., National Association of

Securities Dealers, Inc., and Chicago

Board Options Exchange;

Supplemental Order Regarding

Recently Adopted Rules for Short

Position Reporting

March 7, 1995.

I. Background

The New York Stock Exchange, Inc.

(‘‘NYSE’’), on October 27, 1994, the

Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.,

(‘‘Phlx’’), on October 20, 1994, the

Pacific Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘PSE’’), on

November 23, 1994, the Boston Stock

Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BSE’’), on November

28, 1994, the Chicago Stock Exchange,

Inc. (‘‘CHX’’), on December 12, 1994, the

National Association of Securities

Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’‘), on December 2,

19941 and the Chicago Board Options

Exchange (‘‘CBOE’’), on January 3, 1995,

(collectively, ‘‘self-regulatory

organizations’’ or ‘‘SROs’’) submitted to

the Securities and Exchange

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

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

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Act’’)2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3

proposed rule changes to facilitate

uniform short position reporting

requirements.4

The proposed rule change filed by the

CBOE was published for comment in

Securities Exchange Act Release No.

35227 (January 13, 1995), 60 FR 4208

(January 20, 1995). In addition, all of the

other proposed rule changes were

published for comment in Securities

Exchange Act Release No. 35147

(December 23, 1994), 60 FR 518 (January

4, 1995). No comments were received on
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Notices 13745

5Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35287

(January 27, 1995), 60 FR 6743 (February 3, 1995)

(‘‘Approval Order’’).

6See letter from Salvatore Pallante, Senior Vice

President, Member Firm Regulation, NYSE, to Holly

Smith, Associate Director, Division of Market

Regulation, Commission, dated March 1, 1995.

7See Approval Order, footnote 7.

8The example in the Approval Order concerns a

broker-dealer with three accounts—account 1 has

short interest of 100 shares, account 2 has short

interest of 225 shares and account 3 is long 150

shares. As indicated in the Approval Order, if the

three accounts are for different customers then the

broker-dealer shall report a gross short interest of

325 (not netted to 175). In contrast to the Approval

Order, however, if account 1 is a firm customer

account, and accounts 2 and 3 are firm proprietary

accounts, the broker-dealer would still report total

short interest of 325 (not netted to 75), as the

broker-dealer would not net the firm’s proprietary

positions but would report a total gross short

position (customer 100 and firm 225).

9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b) and 78o–3 (1988).

10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2) (1988).

11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) (1994).

the proposal from either notice

publication.

The Commission issued an order on

January 27, 1995, approving the

proposed rule changes referenced

above.5

II. Discussion

As explained in the Approval Order,

the purpose of the rule changes is to

ensure that all broker-dealers registered

in the United States report open short

positions to an SRO. The proposed rule

changes emanated from an initiative by

the SROs, as Intermarket Surveillance

Group (‘‘ISG’’) members, to ensure

uniform short position reporting in U.S.

traded securities.

Substantively, the new reporting

requirements will continue to include

stocks and warrants, including odd-lots,

in each such security traded on a United

States securities exchange or

association. Further, the reports will

continue to include both customer and

proprietary positions.

At the time the Approval Order was

published, the Commission understood

that broker-dealers with multiple

proprietary accounts netted such

accounts for purposes of reporting their

short positions. In the interim, however,

it has come to light that industry

practice varies and that the preferred

method is not to net multiple accounts.

Specifically, the NYSE indicated in a

letter submitted to the Commission on

March 1, 1995, that ‘‘firms will use the

gross method of reporting short interest

positions rather than netting.’’ The

remaining ISG participants that adopted

the rules at hand have confirmed that

industry practice should not be

disrupted for purposes of reporting firm

short interest positions. The NYSE

requested that the Approval Order be

modified to reflect industry practice at

the time of the rule filing.6

The Commission notes that the

method of calculation was not a

determinative factor in the decision to

approve the short interest reporting

rules. Rather, the Commission’s goal

was to assure uniformity in the

calculation of short positions to provide

comparable information to the

marketplace. In this regard, the

Commission has not identified

advantages of one method over the other

and agrees that, consistent with industry

practice, short interest positions for both

like and non-like accounts may be

reported gross for purposes of the new

reporting requirements.

The Approval Order included an

example to illustrate the method, net

reporting, which the Commission

understood to be the industry standard.7

The modification requested by the

NYSE would be reflected in this

example by providing that the firm

would not net its proprietary accounts.8

The Commission finds that the

clarification does not alter the statutory

basis relied upon in the Approval Order.

The Commission continues to believe,

therefore, that the short interest position

reporting rules and methodology for

such calculation as outlined herein 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)

and 15A.9 In particular, the Commission

believes the proposal is consistent with

the Sections 6(b)(5) and 15A(b)(6)

requirements that the rules of an

exchange be designed to promote just

and equitable principles of trade, to

prevent fraudulent and manipulative

acts, and, in general, to protect investors

and the public, in that the proposal

should enhance the ability of the SROs,

both collectively and individually, to

monitor short interest reporting, and to

reinforce their regulatory and

surveillance capabilities in this area.

III. Conclusion

It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to

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

Approval Order is hereby revised as

described above.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.11

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–6163 Filed 3–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Reporting and Recordkeeping

Requirements Under OMB Review

ACTION: Notice of reporting requirements

submitted for review.

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

Chapter 35), agencies are required to

submit proposed reporting and

recordkeeping requirements to OMB for

review and approval, and to publish a

notice in the Federal Register notifying

the public that the agency has made

such a submission.

DATE: Comments should be submitted

within 30 days of this publication in the

Federal Register. If you intend to

comment but cannot prepare comments

promptly, please advise the OMB

Reviewer and the Agency Clearance

Officer before the deadline.

COPIES: Request for clearance (OMB 83–

1), supporting statement, and other

documents submitted to OMB for

review may be obtained from the

Agency Clearance Officer. Submit

comments to the Agency Clearance

Officer and the OMB Reviewer.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Agency Clearance Officer: Cleo

Verbillis, Small Business

Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 5th

Floor, Washington, DC 20416,

Telephone: (202) 205–6629.

OMB Reviewer: Donald Arbuckle,

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, New Executive Office Building,

Washington, DC 20503.

Title: Program Evaluation SBA 7(a)

Loan Program.

Form No.: N/A.

Frequency: On Occasion.

Description of Respondents: 7(a) loan

applicants.

Annual Responses: 1,700.

Annual Burden: 312.

Dated: March 2, 1995.

Calvin Jenkins,

Assistant Administrator for Administration.

[FR Doc. 95–6251 Filed 3–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–M

[Declaration of Disaster Loan Area #2760;

Amendment #3]

California; Declaration of Disaster

Loan Area

The above-numbered Declaration is

hereby amended, effective February 27,

1995, to include Kings County in the

State of California as a disaster area due

to damages resulting from winter storms

causing flooding, landslides, mud and