Date: 12/9/98 4:26 PM Johnathan G. Katz Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20549 Re: File No S7-26-98 Dear Mr. Katz: I appreciate the opportunity to comment on Re-proposed Books & RecordsRule. Although I cannot speak for them, most Local firms share many of the same challenges and concerns regarding this proposal. Firms already require of their sales staff new account forms that contain information on the client's investment experience and financial background. It is an important document maintained at the firm. However, the account record is not the only record maintained, and it should not always be the primary determinant of suitability/unsuitability in arbitration proceedings. A broker in dealing with a customer will gather additional suitability information that should not be supplanted in a legal proceeding by the customer account form. The original proposal on customer records contained comment on the categorization of customer's investment objectives. Comments were made on how frequently objectives can change, and that the terms used in the original proposal were imprecise. The re-proposal eliminates some of the imprecision of the original, and creates new ones in other areas. Who will define the required information in the categories on the account record? Who should be considered the customer as it pertains to the Customer Account Record? Are the records to be maintained on each individual associated with an account, the individual who opens the account, approves any transactions, pays for any purchases? The process of furnishing the customer account record to the client is time consuming and costly. Much will have to be done manually. If the customer does not respond, do we need to note that on the customer records? If so, that means all of our account records will be updated, not just 10% as estimated. Sincerely, William C. Alsover President Centennial Securities Company 3075 Charlevoix Drive SE Grand Rapids, MI 49546