[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 213 (Friday, November 1, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56594-56595]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-28077]



[[Page 56594]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-37875; File No. SR-NASD-96-37]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate 
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by National Association of 
Securities Dealers, Inc. Relating to the Policy and Practice Concerning 
the Application of the Eligibility Provision in Rule 10304 of the NASD 
Code of Arbitration Procedure

October 28, 1996.
    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 October 
15, 1996, NASD Regulation, Inc. (``NASD Regulation'') 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 NASD Regulation. NASD Regulation has designated this 
proposal as one constituting a stated policy, practice, or 
interpretation under Sec. 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act, which renders the 
rule effective upon the Commission's receipt of this filing. 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

    NASD Regulation is proposing to amend its policy and practice 
concerning the application of the eligibility provision in Rule 10304 
of the Code of Arbitration Procedure (``Code'') of the National 
Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (``NASD'' or ``Association'') 
to the effect that arbitrators, not the NASD Regulation staff, shall 
determine whether a dispute is eligible for arbitration. Below is the 
text of the proposed policy and practice change.
    Pursuant to Rule 10304 of the Code, ``[n]o dispute, claim or 
controversy shall be eligible for submission to arbitration under this 
Code where six (6) years have elapsed from the occurrence or event 
giving rise to the act or dispute, claim or controversy.'' Effective 
August 1, 1996, the NASD Regulation staff will no longer make 
preliminary determinations concerning the eligibility of a claim for 
arbitration. The NASD Regulation staff instead will address questions 
concerning the eligibility of a claim according to the following 
procedures:
    1. Upon the filing or receipt of a claim, the staff reviews the 
claim to determine if the claimant has identified when the transaction 
at issue occurred or when the claim arose. If not identified, the 
Statement of Claim is retained by the claimant is asked for additional 
information about the age of the claim.
    2. If a claim identifies when the transaction at issue occurred or 
when the claim arose, it is served on the respondents. It is then the 
respondent's determination whether to challenge the eligibility of the 
claim.
    3. Any motions to dismiss the claim on eligibility grounds and any 
responses thereto are forwarded to the arbitrators for a decision.
    4. For those cases filed prior to August 1, 1996 where the staff 
has made a preliminary eligibility ruling in response to a respondent's 
motion, the moving papers will be forwarded to the arbitrators with a 
reminder that the arbitrators must review the issue de novo and must 
not accord the staff's preliminary ruling any weight.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, NASD Regulation 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. NASD Regulation 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
    NASD Regulation is proposing to amend its policy and practice 
concerning the application of the eligibility provision in Rule 10304 
of the Code to the effect that arbitrators, not the NASD Regulation 
staff, shall determine whether a dispute is eligible for arbitration 
under Rule 10304.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This policy is intended to be temporary. NASD Regulation 
intends the policy to remain in effect until an amendment to Rule 
10304 can be developed and approved. The NASD's Arbitration Policy 
Task Force Report on Securities Arbitration Reform recommended 
suspending the eligibility rule. NASD Regulation, in consultation 
with the Securities Industry Conference on Arbitration (SICA) and 
others, is considering other alternatives to suspending the 
eligibility rule. The policy will not be included in the NASD Manual 
because NASD Regulation intends to propose a new arbitration 
eligibility rule within a few months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Until recently, the NASD Regulation staff made preliminary 
eligibility determinations, both before and after a claim had been 
served, in cases where a bright line test could be applied. Before a 
claim was served the staff would, upon examination of the allegations 
in the Statement of Claim, determine if the occurrence or event giving 
rise to the act or dispute, claim or controversy took place more than 
six (6) years prior to the filing of the Statement of Claim. If the 
staff determined that this was the case, it would advise the claimant 
that the claim was ineligible for arbitration. Once a claim had been 
served and the staff had previously made a preliminary eligibility 
determination upon the motion of a party, upon the request of a party 
the arbitrators could review the preliminary staff determination and 
accept or reject it. The other self-regulatory organization (``SRO'') 
arbitration forums have also followed this practice.
    NASD Regulation has determined that because the practice of having 
the staff make preliminary eligibility determinations is not expressly 
provided for in the Code, questions may arise concerning the legal 
effect of these determinations. Accordingly, NASD Regulation is 
proposing to amend the existing policy and practice to eliminate staff 
eligibility determinations.
    The amended policy, which is consistent with the Code and plain 
language of Rule 10304, will require the staff, upon the filing or 
receipt of a claim, to review the claim to determine if the claimant 
has identified when the transaction at issue occurred or when the claim 
arose. If not identified, the Statement of Claim is retained but the 
claimant is asked for additional information about the age of the 
claim. By requiring that claims identify when the transaction at issue 
occurred or arose, NASD Regulation is facilitating the ability of the 
arbitrators to determine if the claim is eligible.
    If a claim identifies when the transaction at issue occurred or 
when the claim arose, or is amended to provide such information, it is 
served on the respondents. Once the claim is served, the respondents 
can decide whether or not to challenge the eligibility of the claim. If 
a respondent submits a motion to dismiss on eligibility grounds, the 
claimants will have an opportunity to respond, and the motion and the 
responses will be forwarded to the arbitrators for a decision.
    NASD Regulation has also determined that where a case was filed 
prior to August 1, 1996, and the staff has made a preliminary 
eligibility ruling in response to a respondent's motion, the moving 
papers will be forwarded to the

[[Page 56595]]

arbitrators with a reminder that the arbitrators must review the issue 
de novo and must not accord the staff's preliminary ruling any weight.
    NASD Regulation notes, as described above, that eligibility 
determinations have always involved an element of staff discretion. 
Thus, adoption of the policy set forth above is not a substantive 
change in Rule 10304 or its interpretation; it is a change in the 
manner in which the staff exercises its discretion to administer the 
arbitration process under the Rule.
2. Statutory Basis
    NASD Regulation believes that the proposed rule change is 
consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act \2\ in 
that amending the policy for applying the eligibility provision of the 
Code serves the public interest by enhancing the perception of fairness 
of such proceedings by the parties to such proceedings. Unless 
otherwise expressly provided for in the Code, dispositive motions 
should be decided by the arbitrators because the arbitrators are the 
designated adjudicators of all issues of fact, law and procedure in an 
arbitration. To the extent the parties to such proceedings express 
increased satisfaction with the resolution of eligibility issues, the 
goal of providing the investing public with a fair, efficient and cost-
effective forum for the resolution of disputes will have been advanced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    NASD Regulation does not believe that the proposed rule change will 
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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective upon filing pursuant 
to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act \3\ and subparagraph (e) of Rule 
19b-4 \4\ thereunder in that it constitutes a stated policy, practice 
or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or 
enforcement of an existing rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 30 days of the filing of a rule change pursuant 
to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act, the Commission may summarily 
abrogate the rule change if it appears to the Commission that such 
action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the 
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of 
the Act.

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 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. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-NASD-96-37 and should 
be submitted by November 22, 1996.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, 
pursuant to delegated authority.
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-28077 Filed 10-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M