[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 21, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9704-9708]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-4085]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-35364; File No. SR-NASD-95-8]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Proposed Rule Change by
the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., Relating to a Six
Month Extension of the SOES Minimum Exposure Limit Rule and the SOES
Automated Quotation Update Feature
February 13, 1995.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on February 10, 1995, the
National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (``NASD'' or
``Association'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'' or ``SEC'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the NASD.
The Commission in publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
\1\15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) (1988).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The NASD proposed to extend, until October 2, 1995, the
effectiveness of certain rules governing the operation of The Nasdaq
Stock Market, Inc.'s (``Nasdaq'') Small Order Execution System
(``SOES''). Specifically, these SOES rules, which were previously
approved by the Commission on a pilot basis on December 23, 1993\2\ and
recently extended through March 27, 1995,\3\ provide for: (1) a
reduction in the minimum exposure limit for unpreferenced SOES orders
from five times the maximum order size to two times the maximum order
size, and for the elimination of exposure limits for preferenced orders
(``SOES Minimum [[Page 9705]] Exposure Limit Rule''); and (2)
implementation of an automated function for updating market maker
quotations when the market maker's exposure limit has been exhausted
(``SOES Automated Quotation Update Feature''). These rules are part of
a set of SOES rules approved by the SEC on a pilot basis known as the
Interim SOES Rules.\4\
\2\See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 33377 (Dec. 23,
1993), 58 FR 69419 (Dec. 30, 1993) (``Interim SOES Rules Approval
Order'').
\3\See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35275 (Jan. 25,
1995), 60 FR 6327 (Feb. 1, 1995) (``Interim SOES Rules Extension
Order'').
\4\As first approved by the Commission on December 23, 1993, the
Interim SOES Rules had four components: (1) The SOES minimum
Exposure Limit; (2) the Automated Quotation Update; (3) a reduction
in the maximum size order eligible for execution through SOES from
1,000 shares to 500 shares (``SOES Maximum Order Size''); and (4)
the prohibition of short sales through SOES. In light of the SEC's
approval of the NASD's short sale rule in June 1994, the NASD did
not seek to extend the prohibition against the entry of short sales
into SOES. Absent SEC approval of an extension of the effectiveness
of the SOES Maximum Order Size rule, the rule will lapse effective
March 28, 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 NASD 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 NASD 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
On December 23, 1993, the SEC issued an order approving the Interim
SOES Rules on a one-year pilot basis effective January 7, 1994. In
response to two applications requesting a stay of the Interim SOES
Rules Approval Order, however, the SEC granted a partial stay of the
effective date of the order through January 25, 1994. Thus, absent
further Commission action, the Interim SOES Rules initially were
effective from January 26, 1994 through January 25, 1995.\5\ On January
25, 1995, the SEC approval an NASD proposal to extend the effectiveness
of the Interim SOES Rules through March 27, 1995.\6\
\5\Securities Exchange Act Release No. 33377 (Dec. 23, 1993), 58
FR 69419 (Dec. 30, 1993) (approving the Interim SOES Rules on a one-
year pilot basis effective January 7, 1994). See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 33424 (Jan. 5, 1994) (order denying stay
and granting interim stay through January 25, 1994) and Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 33635 (Feb. 17, 1994) (order denying
renewed application for stay).
\6\See SOES Interim Rules Extension Order, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described in more detail below, because the NASD believes
implementation of the SOES Minimum Exposure Limit rule and the SOES
Automated Quotation Update Feature have been associated with positive
developments in the markets for Nasdaq securities and clearly have not
had any negative effect on market quality, the NASD believes it is
appropriate and consistent with the maintenance of fair and orderly
markets and the protection of investors to extend the effectiveness of
these rules. In addition, consistent with the termination of the
Interim SOES Rule that prohibited the entry of short sales into SOES,
the NASD believes its instant proposal to continue the effectiveness of
some but not all of the original components of the Interim SOES Rules
is appropriate and consistent with the Act. While the NASD believes the
Interim SOES Rules collectively have had a beneficial impact on the
market, the NASD also believes that each of the Interim SOES Rules has
individually had a benefit on the market. Thus, each one of the Interim
SOES Rules can be evaluated for consistency with the Act independent of
the others. The SOES Minimum Exposure Limit rule and the SOES Automated
Quotation Update Feature reflect a reasoned approach by the NASD to
address the adverse effects on market liquidity attributable to active
intra-day trading activity through SOES, while at the same time not
compromising the ability of small, retail investors to receive
immediate executions through SOES. Specifically, these rules are
designed to address concerns that concentrated, aggressive use of SOES
by a growing number of order entry firms has resulted in increased
volatility in quotations and transaction prices, wide spreads, and the
loss of liquidity for individual and institutional investor orders.
The NASD believes that the same arguments and justifications made
by the NASD in support of approval of the SOES Minimum Exposure Limit
rule and the SOES Automated Quotation Update Feature are just as
compelling today as they were when the SEC relied on them to initially
approve the rules. In sum, the NASD continues to believe that
concentrated bursts of SOES activity by active order-entry firms
contributed to increased short-term volatility, wider spreads, and less
market liquidity on Nasdaq and that the SOES Minimum Exposure Limit
rule and the SOES Automated Quotation Update Feature are an effective
means to minimize these adverse market impacts.
The NASD also notes that the SEC made specific findings in the
Interim SOES Rules Approval Order that the SOES Minimum Exposure Limit
rule and the SOES Automated Quotation Update Feature were consistent
with the Act. In particular, the SEC stated in its approval order that:
a. Because the benefits for market quality of restricting SOES
usage outweigh any potential decrease in pricing efficiency, the
Commission concludes that the net effect of the proposal is to
remove impediments to the mechanism of a free and open market and a
national market system, and to protect investors and the public
interest, and that the proposed rule changes are designed to produce
accurate quotations, consistent with Section 15A(b)(6) and
16A(b)(11) of the Act. In addition, the Commission concludes that
the benefits of the proposal in terms of preserving market quality
and preserving the operational efficiencies of SOES for the
processing of small size retail orders outweigh any potential burden
on competition or costs to customers or broker-dealers affected
adversely by the proposal. Thus, the Commission concludes that the
proposal is consistent with Section 15A(b)(9) of the Act in that it
does not impose a burden on competition which is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\7\
\7\Interim SOES Rules Approval Order, supra note 2, 58 FR at
69423 (footnote omitted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. The Commission also concludes that the proposal advances the
objectives of Section 11A of the Act. Section 11A provides that it
is in the public interest and appropriate for the protection of
investors and the maintenance of fair and orderly markets to assure
economically efficient execution of securities transactions, fair
competition among market participants, and the practicality of
brokers executing orders in the best market. The Commission
concludes that the proposal furthers these objectives by preserving
the operational efficiencies of SOES for the processing of small
orders from retail investors.\8\
\8\Id. (footnote omitted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. The Commission believes that it is appropriate to restrict
trading practices through SOES that impose excessive risks and costs
on market makers and jeopardize market quality, and which do not
provide significant contributions to liquidity or pricing
efficiency. * * * The Commission believes that it is more important
to ensure that investors seeking to establish or liquidate an
inventory position have ready access to a liquid Nasdaq market and
SOES than to protect the ability of customers to use SOES for intra-
day trading strategies.\9\
\9\Id. at 69424-25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. The Commission believes that there are increased costs
associated with active intra-day trading activity through SOES that
undermine Nasdaq market quality * * * Active intra-day trading
activity through SOES can also contribute to instability in the
market. * * *\10\
\10\Id. (footnote omitted).
e. In addition, these waves of executions can make it difficult
to maintain orderly markets. Given the increased volatility
[[Page 9706]] associated with these waves of intra-day trading
activity, market makers are subject to increased risks that
concentrated waves of orders will cause the market to move away. As
a result, individual market makers may be unwilling to narrow the
current spread and commit additional capital to the market by
raising the bid or lowering the offer. When market makers commit
less capital and quote less competitive markets, prices can be
expected to deteriorate more rapidly. Accordingly, the Commission
believes that it is appropriate for the NASD to take measured steps
to redress the economic incentives for frequent intra-day trading
inherent in SOES to prevent SOES activity from having a negative
effect on market prices and volatility.\11\
\11\Id. at 69424-26 (footnote omitted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
f. The Commission does not believe that intra-day trading
strategies through SOES contribute significantly to market
efficiency in the sense of causing prices to reflect information
more accurately.\12\
\12\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
g. The Commission has evaluated each of the proposed
modifications to SOES, and concludes that each of the modifications
reduces the adverse effects of active trading through SOES and
better enables market makers to manage risk while maintaining
continuous participation in SOES. In addition, the Commission does
not believe that any of the modifications will have a significant
negative effect on market quality. To the extent that any of the
modifications may result in a potential loss of liquidity for small
investor orders, the Commission believes that these reductions are
marginal and are outweighed by the benefits of preserving market
maker participation in SOES and increasing the quality of executions
for public and institutional orders as a result of the
modifications.\13\
\13\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
h. The Commission * * * has determined that the instant
modifications to SOES further objectives of investor protection and
fair and orderly markets, and that these goals, on balance, outweigh
any marginal effects on liquidity for small retail orders, and any
anti-competitive effects on order entry firms and their customers.
The Commission concludes that the ability of active traders to place
trades through a system designed for retail investors can impair
market efficiency and jeopardize the level of market making capital
devoted to Nasdaq issues. The Commission believes that the rule
change is an appropriate response to active trading through SOES,
and that the modifications will reduce the effects of concentrated
intra-day SOES activity on the market.\14\
\14\Id. at 69429.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NASD believes these significant statutory findings by the SEC
regarding the SOES Minimum Exposure Limit rule and the SOES Automated
Quotation Update Feature and the SEC's assessment of the likely
benefits to the marketplace that would result from the rules have been
confirmed and substantiated by econometric studies on the effectiveness
of the Interim SOES Rules conducted by the NASD's Economic Research
Department\5\ and an independent economist commissioned by the
NASD.\16\ When the SEC approved the Interim SOES Rules, it stated that
``[a]ny further action the NASD seeks with respect to SOES--extension
of these modifications upon expiration, or introduction of other
changes--will require independent consideration under Section 19 of the
Act.''\17\ In addition, the SEC stated that, should the NASD desire to
extend these SOES changes or modify SOES, the Commission would expect,
``the NASD to monitor the quality of its markets and assess the effects
of the approved SOES changes on market quality for Nasdaq securities.''
Also, if feasible, the SEC instructed the NASD to provide a
quantitative and statistical assessment of the effects of the SOES
changes on market quality; or, if an assessment is not feasible, the
SEC stated that the NASD should provide a reasoned explanation
supporting that determination.
\15\See letter from Gene Finn, Vice President & Chief Economist,
NASD, to Katherine England, Assistant Director, National Market
System & OTC Regulation, SEC, dated October 24, 1994 (letter
submitted in connection with the NASD's NPROVE filing, SR-
NASD-94-13).
\16\See The Association Between the Interim SOES Rules and
Nasdaq Market Quality, Dean Furbush, Ph.D., Economists, Inc.,
Washington D.C., December 30, 1994 (``Furbush Study'').
\17\Interim SOES Rules Approved Order, supra note 2, 59 FR at
69429.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In sum, the NASD's study found that:
Since the SOES changes went into effect in January 1994,
the statistical evidence indicated that when average daily volume,
stock price, and stock price volatility are held constant through
regression techniques, quoted percentage spreads in Nasdaq securities
experienced a decline in the immediate period following implementation
of the changes and have continued to decline since then. The
statistical evidence also showed that the narrowing of quoted
percentage spreads became more pronounced and robust the longer the
Interim SOES Rules were in effect. In particular, quoted spreads in
cents per share for the 500 largest Nasdaq National Market securities
experienced a sharp decline from April 28 to May 12 and from June 23 to
July 18.\18\
\18\Some press reports have attributed the recent decline in
spreads for Nasdaq stocks to the publication, on May 26 and 27,
1994, of newspaper articles in The Wall Street Journal, The Los
Angeles Times and other publications reporting the results of an
economic study conducted by two academicians that illustrated the
lack of odd-eighth quotes for active Nasdaq stocks. Contrary to
these press reports, this study shows that spreads had indeed
narrowed before publication of these articles (from April 28 to May
12), stabilized at these narrower levels from mid-May until June 23,
and declined again from June 23 to July 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the exception of a brief, market-wide period of
volatility experienced by stocks traded on Nasdaq, the New York Stock
Exchange, and the American Stock Exchange during the Spring, the
volatility of Nasdaq securities appears to be unchanged in the period
following implementation of the changes; and
A smaller percentage of Nasdaq stocks experienced extreme
relative price volatility after implementation of the rules and that
these modifications, in turn, suggest a reduction in relative
volatilities since the rules were put into effect.
The Furbush Study also corroborated the findings of the NASD's
study. This study found that there was a statistically significant
improvement in effective spreads for the top 100 Nasdaq stocks (based
on dollar volume) during the three month period following
implementation of the rules. Moreover, the study also found that the
most significant improvement in effective spreads for the top 100
stocks occurred for trade sizes between 501 and 1,000 shares, precisely
the level that was made ineligible for SOES trading by the Interim SOES
Rules. In addition, the study found that the average number of market
makers for the top ten Nasdaq-listed stocks increased from 44.3 to
46.0, or 3.8 percent, and from 30.2 to 30.9 for the top 100 stocks, or
2.3 percent. Although correlation does not necessarily imply causation,
as noted by the SEC when it approved the Interim SOES Rules, the NASD
believes that positive market developments clearly have been associated
with implementation of the Interim SOES Rules.
The NASD also believes that these studies of the effectiveness of
the Interim SOES Rules lend credence to another NASD study that was
submitted to the SEC in support of approval of the Interim SOES
Rules.\19\ In the May 1993 SOES Study, the NASD found that concentrated
waves of orders entered into SOES by active order-entry firms resulted
in discernible degradation to the quality of the Nasdaq market.
Specifically, the study found, among other things, that: (1) bursts of
orders entered into SOES by active order entry firms frequently result
in a decline in the bid price and a widening of the bid-ask spread; (2)
there is a significant [[Page 9707]] positive relationship between
increases in spreads and volume attributable to active order-entry
firms as it related to total SOES volume per security; and (3) activity
by active order-entry firms resulted in higher price volatility and
less liquidity--higher price changes are associated with high active
trading firm volume, even after controlling for normal price
fluctuations.
\19\See 1NASD Department of Economic Research: Impact of SOES
Active Trading Firms on Nasdaq Market Quality (May 12, 1993) (``May
1993 SOES Study''). See also Securities Exchange Act Release No.
32313 (May 17, 1993), 58 FR 29647 (publication of the study for
comment).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, in light of all the above-cited statutory findings made
by the SEC when it approved the SOES Minimum Exposure Limit rule and
the SOES Automated Quotation Update Feature, coupled with the NASD's
findings that these rules, as well as the rest of the Interim SOES
Rules, have been associated with positive market developments in terms
of lower spreads on Nasdaq and less stocks with extreme relative price
volatility, the NASD believes it would be consistent with the Act for
the Commission to extend the effectiveness of the SOES Minimum Exposure
Limit rule and the SOES Automated Quotation Update Feature for a six-
month period. In sum, the NASD believes its study and the Furbush Study
affirm the validity and correctness of the SEC's prior statutory
findings made in connection with the approval of these rules. Moreover,
even if the Commission is unwilling to find positive significance in
the NASD's statistical analyses, at the very least, these studies
indicate that the market has not been harmed by implementation of these
rules.
In addition, even if the Commission concludes that the Interim SOES
Rules have had no impact on market quality, the NASD believes the
Commission's approval of New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') Rule 80A on
a permanent basis illustrates that the Commission would still have a
sufficient basis to approve an extension on the SOES Minimum Exposure
Limit rule and the SOES Automated Quotation Update Feature for a six
month period.\20\ When NYSE Rule 80A was proposed, the Commission
received considerable adverse comment to the effect that there was no
causal relationship between index arbitrage and market volatility and
that activation of the rule during turbulent market conditions could
have disastrous effects on related options and futures markets and
actually exacerbate market volatility. Despite these comments, the
commission approved the proposal on a one-year pilot basis noting that
``the NYSE proposal represents a modest step, proposed on a pilot
basis, to attempt to address the issue of market volatility.''\21\
After the one year pilot, the NYSE prepared a report that, in the SEC's
words, found that the standard measures of NYSE market quality appear
largely unaffected by Rule 80A. Specifically, the NYSE Report indicated
that: (1) quotes on the NYSE did not widen after the 50 Dow Jones
Industrial Average point trigger was reached; and (2) the imposition of
Rule 80A did not have any negative effect on price continuity and depth
in the market.\22\ In addition, in approving Rule 80A on a permanent
basis, the SEC noted that the rule ``represents a modest but useful
step by the NYSE to attempt to address the issue of market
volatility.''\23\ that the rule ``has not been disruptive to the
marketplace,''\24\ and that there was a ``lack of evidence of any
harmful effects of Rule 80A.''\25\ In sum, the SEC discussion of the
statutory basis for approval of NYSE Rule 80A focused in large part on
the fact that Rule 80A did not have any adverse impacts on market
quality on the NYSE and that, as a result, the NYSE should be given the
latitude to take reasonable steps to address excessive volatility in
its marketplace. Accordingly, the NASD believes the SEC should afford
the NASD the same regulatory flexibility that it afforded the NYSE to
implement rules reasonably designed to enhance the quality of Nasdaq
and minimize the effects of potentially disruptive trading practices.
\20\Rule 80A provides that when the Dow Jones Industrial Average
declines or advances by 50 points or more, all index arbitrage
orders to sell or buy must be executed in a market stabilizing
manner.
\21\See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 28282 (July 30,
1990), 55 FR 31468, 31472 (Order approving File Nos. SR-NYSE-90-5
and 90-11).
\22\See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 29854 (Oct. 24,
1991), 56 FR 55963 (Oct. 30, 1991) (order approving file SR-NYSE-91-
21) (``Rule 80A Approval Order'').
\23\Id. 56 FR at 55967.
\24\Id.
\25\Id. 56 FR at 55967-68
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Sections 15A(b)(6), 15A(b)(9), 15A(b)(11) and 11A(a)(1)(C) of the Act.
Among other things, Section 15A(b)(6) requires that the rules of a
national securities association be 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 regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system and in general to
protect investors and the public interest. Specifically, the NYSE is
proposing to extend the effectiveness of the SOES Minimum Exposure
Limit rule and the SOES Automated Quotation Update Feature for six
months because of concerns that concentrated, aggressive use of SOES by
a growing number of order entry firms has resulted in increased
volatility in quotations and transactions prices, wider spreads, and
the loss of liquidity for individual and institutional investor orders,
all to the detriment of public investors and the public interest. The
NYSE believes the SOES Minimum Exposure Limit rule and the SOES
Automated Quotation Update Feature have operated to rectify this
situation while continuing to provide an effective opportunity for the
prompt, reliable execution of small orders received from the investing
public. Accordingly, in order to protect investors and the public
interest, the NASD believes the Interim SOES Rules should be extended
through October 2, 1995, so that small investors' orders will continue
to receive the fair and efficient executions that SOES was designed to
provide.
Section 15A(b)(9) provides that the rules of the Association may
not impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The SOES Minimum Exposure Limit
rule and the SOES Automated Quotation Update Feature apply across the
board and do not target any particular user or participant, as all
dealers may set their exposure limits at two times the tier size and
all dealers may elect to utilize the automated quote feature.
Accordingly, the NASD believes that these rules changes are not anti-
competitive, as they are uniform in application and they seek to
preserve the ability of SOES to provide fair and efficient automated
executions for small investor orders, while preserving market maker
participation in SOES and market liquidity.
Section 15A(b)(11) empowers the NASD to adopt rules governing the
form and content of quotations relating to securities in the Nasdaq
market. Such rules must be designed to produce fair and informative
quotations, prevent fictitious and misleading quotations, and promote
orderly procedures for collecting and distributing quotations. The NASD
is seeking to continue the effectiveness of the SOES Minimum Exposure
Limit rule and the SOES Automated Quotation Update Feature so that SOES
activity may not result in misleading quotations in the Nasdaq market.
Market makers place quotes in the Nasdaq system and these quotes
comprise the inside market and define the execution parameters of SOES.
[[Page 9708]] When volatility in the SOES environment causes market
makers to widen spreads or to change quotes in anticipation of waves of
SOES orders, quotes in the Nasdaq market become more volatile and may
be misleading to the investing public. Accordingly, absent continuation
of the SOES Minimum Exposure Limit rule and the SOES Automated
Quotation Update Feature, the quotations published by Nasdaq may not
reflect the true market in a security and, as a result, there may be
short-term volatility and loss of liquidity in Nasdaq securities, to
the detriment of the investing public. Further, the continuation of the
automated refresh feature will ensure that a market maker's quotation
is updated after an exposure limit is exhausted. Uninterrupted use of
this function will maintain continuous quotations in Nasdaq as market
makers exhausting their exposure limits in SOES will not be subject to
a `'closed quote'' condition or an unexcused withdrawal from the
market.
Finally, the NASD believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with significant national market system objectives contained
in Section 11A(a)(1)(C) of the Act. This provision states it is in the
public interest and appropriate for the protection of investors and the
maintenance of fair and orderly markets to assure, among other things,
(i) economically efficient execution of securities transactions; (ii)
fair competition among brokers and dealers; and (iii) the practically
of brokers executing investor orders in the best market. Specifically,
the SOES Minimum Exposure Limit rule and the SOES Automated Quotation
Update Feature advance each of these objectives by preserving the
operational efficiencies of SOES for the processing of small investors'
orders, by maintaining current levels of market maker participation
through reduced financial exposure from unpreferenced orders, and by
reducing price volatility and the widening of market makers' spreads in
response to the practices of order entry firms active in SOES.
In addition, for the same reasons provided by the SEC when it
approved the Interim SOES Rules that are cited above in the text
accompanying footnotes 7 through 14, the NASD believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with Sections 15A(b)(6), 15A(b)(9),
15A(b)(11) and 11A(a)(1)(C) of the Act.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The NASD believes that the proposed rule change will not result in
any burden on competition that is 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
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 date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer 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 NASD consents, the Commission will:
A. by order approve such 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, 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 for 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. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-95-8 and
should be submitted by March 14, 1995.
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.
\26\17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12) (1994)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margaret H. MacFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-4085 Filed 2-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M