From: Richard P. Ryder
Sent: August 10, 2005
Subject: File No. SR-NASD-2005-032

Securities Arbitration Commentator, Inc.
P. O. Box 112
Maplewood, NJ 07040

Richard P. Ryder, President

August 10, 2005

Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary
Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, NE
Washington, DC 20549-9303

RE: SR-NASD-2005-032
NASD Award Explanations Rule Proposal

Dear Secretary Katz:

NASDís proposal to compel arbitrators to issue Awards with explanations of their rulings willl certainly change the face of securities arbitration. The question the Commission needs to answer, as SRO arbitrationís shepherd, is whether that will hurt the flock or contribute to its health and well-being.

On that question, our newsletter for securities arbitration professionals has entertained considerable debate. To provide the Commissioners with the benefit of that debate, I have attached to this e-mail message two PDF files containing three articles: (1) Prof. Constantine N. Katsoris, a veteran Arbitrator and the current Chair of the Securities Industry Conference on Arbitration, argues that the new proposal will not help investors and will frustrate arbitrators who will not be advised of the need to write an explanation at the time they accept an appointment; (2) H. Thomas Fehn, a long-time securities arbitration practitioner who co-chairs a very popular, annual PLI program on securities arbitration, presents the reasons for reasoning in securities arbitration Awards; and (3) Aegis Frumento, a defense lawyer and Arbitrator, sees the antithetical nature of this change to arbitrationís underpinnings.

These are thorough and thoughtful pieces dealing directly with the proposal that is before the Commission today. As it is difficult to contribute more by adding our own mixed thoughts on the subject, I am pleased to make this offering and to express thanks to the Commission for considering public opinion before ruling on the current submission.


Richard P. Ryder


2005 SAC No. 2

2005 SAC No. 3