[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 212 (Wednesday, November 2, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76395-76400]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26401]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IC-32340; File No. 812-14472]

NF Investment Corp., et al.; Notice of Application

October 27, 2016.
AGENCY:  Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION:  Notice of application for an order to amend a prior order
under sections 17(d), 57(a)(4) and 57(i) of the Investment Company Act
of 1940 (the ``Act'') and rule 17d-1 under the Act to permit certain
joint transactions otherwise prohibited by sections 17(d), 57(a)(4) and
57(i) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act.

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

Summary of Application:  Applicants request an order (``Order'') to
amend a prior order to permit certain business development companies
(``BDCs'') and closed-end investment companies to co-invest in
portfolio companies with each other and with certain other affiliated
investment funds and broker-dealers. The Order would supersede the
prior order.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ NF Investment Corp., et al., Investment Company Act Rel.
Nos. 30900 (Jan. 31, 2014) (notice) and 30968 (Feb. 26, 2014)
(order).

Applicants: NF Investment Corp. (``NFIC''); Carlyle GMS Finance, Inc.
(``CGMSF,'' and together with NFIC, the ``Existing Regulated Funds'');
NFIC SPV LLC (``NFIC Sub''); Carlyle GMS Finance SPV LLC (``CGMSF
Sub'''); Carlyle GMS Finance MM CLO 2015-1 LLC (``2015-1 Issuer,'' and
together with CFMSF Sub and NFIC Sub, the ``Existing SPV Subs'')
(collectively, the ``Existing Co-Investment Affiliates''); Carlyle GMS
Investment Management L.L.C. (``CGMSIM'') on behalf of itself and its
successors; \2\ and TCG Securities, L.L.C. (``TCG'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The term ``successor'' as applied to CGMSIM means an entity
that results from a reorganization into another jurisdiction or
change in the type of business organization.

Filing Dates: The application was filed on May 22, 2015, and amended on
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 8, 2015, March 30, 2016, and August 4, 2016.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on November 21, 2016, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Pursuant to Rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing
requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts
bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason
for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be
notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the
Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: The Commission: Brent J. Fields, Secretary, U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F St. NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
Applicants: Carlyle GMS Finance, Inc., 520 Madison Avenue, 38th Floor,
New York, NY 10022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean E. Minarick, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6811 or Daniele Marchesani, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Chief Counsel's Office, Division of Investment Management).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or for an
applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. CGMSF and NFIC are both Maryland corporations organized as non-
diversified, closed-end management investment companies that have
elected to be regulated as BDCs under Section 54(a) of the Act.\3\ The
Objectives and Strategies \4\ of both

CGMSF and NFIC are to generate current income and capital appreciation
primarily through debt investments in U.S. middle market companies. The
board of directors of NFIC and CGMSF (each a ``Board'') will be
comprised of directors, a majority of whom will not be ``interested
persons,'' within the meaning of section 2(a)(19) of the Act (the
``Non-Interested Directors'') of NFIC or CGMSF. The Existing SPV Subs
are each an SPV Sub (defined below) of either NFIC or CGMSF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section 2(a)(48) defines a BDC to be any closed-end
investment company that operates for the purpose of making
investments in securities described in sections 55(a)(1) through
55(a)(3) of the Act and makes available significant managerial
assistance with respect to the issuers of such securities.
    \4\ ``Objectives and Strategies'' means the investment
objectives and strategies of a Regulated Fund (as defined below), as
described in the filings made with the Commission by the Regulated
Fund under the Exchange Act or under the Securities Act of 1933 (the
``Securities Act'') and the Act, and the Regulated Fund's reports to
shareholders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. CGMSIM is registered as an investment adviser under the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the ``Advisers Act'') and serves as
the investment adviser to the Existing Regulated Funds. CGMSIM is a
Delaware corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of The Carlyle Group
L.P. (``Carlyle'').
    3. TCG, a wholly owned subsidiary of Carlyle, is registered as a
limited purpose broker-dealer under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'') and is a Delaware limited liability company that,
from time to time, may hold various assets in a principal capacity.
When acting in this capacity, TCG, and any other future wholly or
majority owned broker-dealer subsidiaries of Carlyle and any future
wholly owned subsidiaries of such broker-dealer subsidiaries who intend
to participate in the Co-Investment Program are collectively referred
to as the ``Capital Markets Affiliates.''
    4. Applicants seek an Order to permit a Regulated Fund \5\ (or any
SPV Sub, as defined below), on the one hand, and one or more Co-
Investment Affiliates,\6\ on the other hand, to participate in the same
investment opportunities through a co-investment program (the ``Co-
Investment Program'') where such participation would otherwise be
prohibited under sections 17(d) and 57(a)(4) of the Act and rule 17d-1
under the Act by (a) co-investing with each other in securities issued
by issuers in private placement transactions in which an Investment
Adviser negotiates terms in addition to price; \7\ and (b) making
additional investments in securities of such issuers, including through
the exercise of warrants, conversion privileges, and other rights to
purchase securities of the issuers (``Follow-On Investments''). ``Co-
Investment Transaction'' means any transaction in which any of the
Regulated Funds (or any SPV Sub) participated together with one or more
Co-Investment Affiliates in reliance on the Order. ``Potential Co-
Investment Transaction'' means any investment opportunity in which any
of the Regulated Funds (or any SPV Sub) could not participate together
with one or more Co-Investment Affiliates without obtaining and relying
on the Order.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Regulated Fund'' means any of the Existing Regulated Funds
and any Future Regulated Fund. ``Future Regulated Fund'' means any
future closed-end management investment company that (a) has elected
to be regulated as a BDC or is registered under the Act; (b) will be
advised by an Investment Adviser and (c) that intends to participate
in the Co-Investment Program (as defined below). The term
``Investment Adviser'' means (a) CGMSIM and (b) any future
investment adviser controlling, controlled by, or under common
control with CGMSIM and is registered as an investment adviser under
the Advisers Act.
    \6\ ``Co-Investment Affiliates'' means (a) the Existing Co-
Investment Affiliates, (b) any Capital Markets Affiliate, or (c) any
Regulated Fund, SPV Sub, or Private Fund. ``Private Fund'' means any
entity (a) whose investment adviser is an Investment Adviser; (b)
that would be an investment company but for section 3(c)(1) or
3(c)(7) of the Act; and (c) that intends to participate in the Co-
Investment Program.
    \7\ The term ``private placement transactions'' means
transactions in which the offer and sale of securities by the issuer
are exempt from registration under the Securities Act.
    \8\ All existing entities that currently intend to rely upon the
Order have been named as applicants. Any other existing or future
entity that relies on the Order in the future will comply with the
terms and conditions of the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Applicants state that a Regulated Fund may, from time to time,
form one or more SPV Subs.\9\ Such a subsidiary would be prohibited
from investing in a Co-Investment Transaction with any Co-Investment
Affiliate because it would be a company controlled by its parent
Regulated Fund for purposes of sections 17(d) and 57(a)(4) and rule
17d-1. Applicants request that each SPV Sub be permitted to participate
in Co-Investment Transactions in lieu of its parent Regulated Fund and
that the SPV Sub's participation in any such transaction be treated,
for purposes of the Order, as though the parent Regulated Fund were
participating directly. Applicants represent that this treatment is
justified because a SPV Sub would have no purpose other than serving as
a holding vehicle for the Regulated Fund's investments and, therefore,
no conflicts of interest could arise between the Regulated Fund and the
SPV Sub. The Board would make all relevant determinations under the
conditions with regard to a SPV Sub's participation in a Co-Investment
Transaction, and the Board would be informed of, and take into
consideration, any proposed use of a SPV Sub in the Regulated Fund's
place. If the Regulated Fund proposes to participate in the same Co-
Investment Transaction with any of its SPV Subs, the Board will also be
informed of, and take into consideration, the relative participation of
the Regulated Fund and the SPV Sub.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ ``SPV Sub'' means an entity that (a) is wholly-owned by a
Regulated Fund (with such Regulated Fund at all times holding,
beneficially and of record, 100% of the voting and economic
interests); (b) whose sole business purpose is to hold one or more
investments on behalf of the Regulated Fund (and, in the case of an
SBIC Subsidiary (as defined below), maintain a license under the SBA
Act (as defined below) and issue debentures guaranteed by the SBA
(as defined below)); (c) with respect to which the Regulated Fund's
Board has the sole authority to make all determinations with respect
to the SPV Sub's participation under the conditions of the
application; and (d) that would be an investment company but for
section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act. ``SBIC Subsidiary'' means an
SPV Sub that is licensed by the Small Business Administration to
operate under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 (the ``SBA
Act'') as a small business investment company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. When considering Potential Co-Investment Transactions for any
Regulated Fund, the applicable Investment Adviser will consider only
the Objectives and Strategies, investment policies, investment
positions, capital available for investment (``Available
Capital''),\10\ and other factors relevant to such Regulated Fund. Upon
issuance of the Order, the Investment Adviser to a Co-Investment
Affiliate or the Co-Investment Affiliates (in the case of Capital
Market Affiliates) will refer to the Investment Advisers of the
Regulated Funds all Potential Co-Investment Transactions within a
Regulated Fund's Objectives and Strategies that are considered for or
by a Co-Investment Affiliate, and such investment opportunities may
result in a Co-Investment Transaction. A Capital Markets Affiliate
would have the opportunity to participate in a Co-Investment
Transaction only if the demand for a Potential Co-Investment
Transaction from the Regulated Funds and the other Co-Investment
Affiliates is less than the total investment opportunity presented by
such Potential Co-Investment Transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Available Capital consists solely of liquid assets not held
for permanent investment, including cash, amounts that can currently
be drawn down from lines of credit, and marketable securities held
for short-term purposes. In addition, Available Capital would
include bona fide uncalled capital commitments that can be called by
the settlement date of the Co-Investment Transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Other than pro rata dispositions and Follow-On Investments as
provided in conditions 7 and 8, and after making the determinations
required in conditions 1 and 2(a), the applicable Investment Adviser
will present each Potential Co-Investment Transaction and the proposed
allocation to the directors of the Board that are eligible to vote
under section 57(o) of the Act (``Eligible Directors''). The ``required

majority,'' as defined in section 57(o) of the Act (``Required
Majority''),\11\ of a Regulated Fund will approve each Co-Investment
Transaction prior to any investment by the Regulated Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ With respect to Regulated Funds that are not BDCs, the
defined terms Eligible Directors and Required Majority apply as if
each Regulated Fund were a BDC subject to section 57(o) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. With respect to the pro rata dispositions and Follow-On
Investments as provided in conditions 7 and 8, a Regulated Fund may
participate in a pro rata disposition or Follow-On Investment without
obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if, among other
things: (i) The proposed participation of each Co-Investment Affiliate
and Regulated Fund in such disposition or Follow-On Investment is
proportionate to its outstanding investments in the issuer immediately
preceding the disposition or Follow-On Investment, as the case may be;
and (ii) the Board of the Regulated Fund has approved that Regulated
Fund's participation in pro rata dispositions and Follow-On Investments
as being in the best interests of the Regulated Fund. If the Board does
not so approve, any such disposition or Follow-On Investment will be
submitted to the Regulated Fund's Eligible Directors. The Board of any
Regulated Fund may at any time rescind, suspend or qualify its approval
of pro rata dispositions and Follow-On Investments with the result that
all dispositions and/or Follow-On Investments must be submitted to the
Eligible Directors.
    9. No Non-Interested Director of a Regulated Fund will have a
financial interest in any Co-Investment Transaction, other than
indirectly through share ownership in one of the Regulated Funds.
    10. If an Investment Adviser, the principal owners of the
Investment Adviser (``Principals''), or any person controlling,
controlled by, or under common control with the Investment Adviser or
the Principals, and the Co-Investment Affiliates (collectively, the
``Holders'') own in the aggregate more than 25 percent of the
outstanding voting shares of a Regulated Fund (the ``Shares''), then
the Holders will vote such Shares as required under condition 16.
Applicants believe that this condition will ensure that the Non-
Interested Directors will act independently in evaluating the Co-
Investment Program, because the ability of an Investment Adviser or the
Principals to influence the Non-Interested Directors by a suggestion,
explicit or implied, that the Non-Interested Directors can be removed
will be limited significantly. Applicants represent that the Non-
Interested Directors will evaluate and approve any such voting trust or
proxy adviser, taking into accounts its qualifications, reputation for
independence, cost to the shareholders, and other factors that they
deem relevant.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act prohibit
affiliated persons of a registered investment company from
participating in joint transactions with the company or a company
controlled by such registered investment company unless the Commission
has granted an order permitting such transactions. Section 57(a)(4) of
the Act prohibits certain affiliated persons of a BDC from
participating in joint transactions with the BDC (or a company
controlled by such BDC) in contravention of rules as prescribed by the
Commission. Section 57(i) of the Act provides that, until the
Commission prescribes rules under section 57(a)(4), the Commission's
rules under section 17(d) of the Act applicable to registered closed-
end investment companies will be deemed to apply to BDCs. Because the
Commission has not adopted any rules under section 57(a)(4), rule 17d-1
applies.
    2. Applicants submit that the Investment Advisers and the entities
that they advise would be deemed to be a person related to, or
affiliated with, a Regulated Fund in a manner described by sections
17(d) or 57(b) and therefore prohibited by sections 17(d) or 57(a)(4)
and rule 17d-1 from participating in the Co-Investment Transactions.
Further, because the SPV Subs are controlled by the Regulated Funds,
the SPV Subs are subject to sections 17(d) or 57(a)(4) and would be
prohibited by rule 17d-1 from participating in the Co-Investment
Transactions without the Order. Finally, because each Capital Markets
Affiliate is under common control with CGMSIM and, therefore, is an
``affiliated person'' of CGMSIM, each Capital Markets Affiliate could
be deemed to be a person related to a Regulated Fund (or an SPV Sub) in
a manner described by section 17(d) or section 57(b) and also
prohibited from participating in the Co-Investment Program.
    3. Rule 17d-1 under the Act generally prohibits participation by a
registered investment company, or a company controlled by such
registered investment company, and an affiliated person (as defined in
section 2(a)(3) of the Act) or principal underwriter for that
investment company, or an affiliated person of such affiliated person
or principal underwriter, in any joint enterprise or other joint
arrangement or profit sharing plan, as defined in the rule, absent an
order by the Commission. Similarly, rule 17d-1, as made applicable to
BDCs by section 57(i), prohibits any person who is related to a BDC in
a manner described in section 57(b), acting as principal, from
participating in, or effecting any transaction in connection with, any
joint enterprise or other joint arrangement or profit-sharing plan in
which the BDC (or a company controlled by such BDC) is a participant,
absent an order from the Commission. In passing upon applications under
rule 17d-1, the Commission considers whether the company's
participation in the joint transaction is consistent with the
provisions, policies, and purposes of the Act and the extent to which
such participation is on a basis different from or less advantageous
than that of other participants.
    4. Applicants state that in the absence of the requested relief,
the Regulated Funds would be, in some circumstances, limited in their
ability to participate in attractive and appropriate investment
opportunities. Applicants believe that the proposed terms and
conditions will ensure that the Co-Investment Transactions are
consistent with the protection of each Regulated Fund's shareholders
and with the purposes intended by the policies and provisions of the
Act. Applicants state that the Regulated Funds' participation in the
Co-Investment Transactions will be consistent with the provisions,
policies and purposes of the Act and on a basis that is not different
from or less advantageous than that of other participants.

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. Each time an investment adviser to any Co-Investment Affiliate
or a Co-Investment Affiliate considers a Potential Co-Investment
Transaction for a Co-Investment Affiliate that falls within a Regulated
Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies, the Regulated Fund's
Investment Adviser will make an independent determination of the
appropriateness of the investment for the Regulated Fund in light of
such Regulated Fund's then-current circumstances.
    2. (a) If the Investment Adviser deems the Regulated Fund's
participation in any such Potential Co-Investment Transaction is
appropriate for the Regulated Fund, it will then determine

an appropriate level of investment for the Regulated Fund.
    (b) If the aggregate amount recommended by an Investment Adviser to
be invested by the Regulated Fund in the Potential Co-Investment
Transaction together with the amount proposed to be invested by the
other Co-Investment Affiliates, collectively, in the same transaction,
exceeds the amount of the investment opportunity, the investment
opportunity will be allocated among them pro rata based on each
participant's Available Capital available for investment in the asset
class being allocated, up to the amount proposed to be invested by
each. The Investment Advisers will provide the Eligible Directors of
each participating Regulated Fund with information concerning each
participating Co-Investment Affiliate's Available Capital to assist the
Eligible Directors with their review of the Regulated Fund's
investments for compliance with these allocation procedures.
    (c) After making the determinations required in conditions 1 and
2(a), the Investment Adviser will distribute written information
concerning the Potential Co-Investment Transaction, including the
amount proposed to be invested by each Co-Investment Affiliate, to the
Eligible Directors of each participating Regulated Fund for their
consideration. A Regulated Fund will co-invest with Co-Investment
Affiliates only if, prior to such Regulated Fund's and any Co-
Investment Affiliates' participation in the Potential Co-Investment
Transaction, a Required Majority of such Regulated Fund concludes that:
    (i) The terms of the Potential Co-Investment Transaction, including
the consideration to be paid, are reasonable and fair to the Regulated
Fund and its shareholders and do not involve overreaching of such
Regulated Fund or its shareholders on the part of any person concerned;
    (ii) the Potential Co-Investment Transaction is consistent with:
    (A) The interests of the shareholders of such Regulated Fund; and
    (B) such Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies;
    (iii) the investment by the Co-Investment Affiliates would not
disadvantage such Regulated Fund, and participation by such Regulated
Fund is not on a basis different from or less advantageous than that of
any Co-Investment Affiliate; provided, that if a Co-Investment
Affiliate, other than such Regulated Fund, gains the right to nominate
a director for election to a portfolio company's board of directors or
the right to have a board observer or any similar right to participate
in the governance or management of the portfolio company, such event
shall not be interpreted to prohibit the Required Majority from
reaching the conclusions required by this condition (2)(c)(iii), if:
    (A) The Eligible Directors will have the right to ratify the
selection of such director or board observer, if any;
    (B) the Investment Advisers agree to, and do, provide, periodic
reports to such Regulated Fund's Board with respect to the actions of
such director or the information received by such board observer or
obtained through the exercise of any similar right to participate in
the governance or management of the portfolio company; and
    (C) any fees or other compensation that any Co-Investment Affiliate
or any affiliated person of a Co-Investment Affiliate receives in
connection with the right of the Co-Investment Affiliate to nominate a
director or appoint a board observer or otherwise to participate in the
governance or management of the portfolio company will be shared
proportionately among the participating Co-Investment Affiliates (the
Co-Investment Affiliates (other than the Regulated Funds) may, in turn,
share their portion with their affiliated persons)) and the applicable
Regulated Fund in accordance with the amount of each party's
investment; and
    (iv) the proposed investment by such Regulated Fund will not
benefit the Investment Advisers or the Co-Investment Affiliates or any
affiliated person of either of them (other than the parties to the Co-
Investment Transaction), except (A) to the extent permitted by
condition 13, (B) to the extent permitted by sections 17(e) and 57(k)
of the Act, as applicable, (C) indirectly, as a result of an interest
in the securities issued by one of the parties to the Co-Investment
Transaction, or (D) in the case of fees or other compensation described
in condition 2(c)(iii)(C).
    3. Each Regulated Fund has the right to decline to participate in
any Potential Co-Investment Transaction or to invest less than the
amount proposed.
    4. The applicable Investment Adviser will present to the Board of
the Regulated Fund, on a quarterly basis, a record of all investments
made by the Co-Investment Affiliates in Potential Co-Investment
Transactions during the preceding quarter that fell within such
Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies that were not
made available to the Regulated Fund, and an explanation of why the
investment opportunities were not offered to the Regulated Fund. All
information presented to the Board of such Regulated Fund pursuant to
this condition will be kept for the life of such Regulated Fund and at
least two years thereafter, and will be subject to examination by the
Commission and its staff.
    5. Except for Follow-On Investments made in accordance with
condition 8,\12\ a Regulated Fund will not invest in reliance on the
Order in any issuer in which any Co-Investment Affiliate or any
affiliated person of a Co-Investment Affiliate is an existing investor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ This exception applies only to Follow-On Investments by a
Regulated Fund in issuers in which that Regulated Fund already holds
investments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. A Regulated Fund will not participate in any Potential Co-
Investment Transaction unless the terms, conditions, price, class of
securities to be purchased, settlement date, and registration rights
will be the same for such Regulated Fund as for the Co-Investment
Affiliates. The grant to a Co-Investment Affiliate, but not such
Regulated Fund, of the right to nominate a director for election to a
portfolio company's board of directors, the right to have an observer
on the board of directors or similar rights to participate in the
governance or management of the portfolio company will not be
interpreted so as to violate this condition 6, if conditions
2(c)(iii)(A), (B) and (C) are met.
    7. (a) If any Co-Investment Affiliate elects to sell, exchange or
otherwise dispose of an interest in a security that was acquired in a
Co-Investment Transaction, the applicable Investment Adviser or Co-
Investment Affiliate (only as to clause (i)) will:
    (i) Notify each Regulated Fund that participated in the Co-
Investment Transaction of the proposed disposition at the earliest
practical time; and
    (ii) formulate a recommendation as to participation by each
Regulated Fund in the disposition.
    (b) Each Regulated Fund will have the right to participate in such
disposition on a proportionate basis, at the same price and on the same
terms and conditions as those applicable to other Co-Investment
Affiliates.
    (c) A Regulated Fund may participate in such disposition without
obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if: (i) The proposed
participation of each Co-Investment Affiliate in such disposition is
proportionate to its outstanding investments in the issuer immediately
preceding the disposition; (ii) the Board of the Regulated Fund has
approved as being in the best interests of the Regulated Fund the
ability to

participate in such dispositions on a pro rata basis (as described in
greater detail in the application); and (iii) the Board of each
Regulated Fund is provided on a quarterly basis with a list of all
dispositions made in accordance with this condition. In all other
cases, the applicable Investment Adviser will provide its written
recommendation as to the Regulated Fund's participation to the Eligible
Directors, and the Regulated Fund will participate in such disposition
solely to the extent that a Required Majority determines that it is in
the Regulated Fund's best interests.
    (d) Each Co-Investment Affiliate will bear its own expenses in
connection with any such disposition.
    8. (a) If any Co-Investment Affiliate desires to make a Follow-On
Investment in a portfolio company whose securities were acquired in a
Co-Investment Transaction, the Investment Adviser or Co-Investment
Affiliate (only as to clause (i)) will:
    (i) Notify each Regulated Fund that participated in the Co-
Investment Transaction of the proposed transaction at the earliest
practical time; and
    (ii) formulate a recommendation as to the proposed participation,
including the amount of the proposed Follow-On Investment, by each
Regulated Fund.
    (b) A Regulated Fund may participate in such Follow-On Investment
without obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if: (i) The
proposed participation of each Co-Investment Affiliate in such
investment is proportionate to its outstanding investments in the
issuer immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment; and (ii) the
Board of the Regulated Fund has approved as being in the best interests
of the Regulated Fund the ability to participate in Follow-On
Investments on a pro rata basis (as described in greater detail in the
application). In all other cases, the applicable Investment Adviser
will provide its written recommendation as to the Regulated Fund's
participation to the Eligible Directors, and the Regulated Fund will
participate in such Follow-On Investment solely to the extent that a
Required Majority determines that it is in the Regulated Fund's best
interests.
    (c) If, with respect to any Follow-On Investment:
    (i) The amount of the opportunity is not based on the Co-Investment
Affiliate's outstanding investments immediately preceding the Follow-On
Investment; and
    (ii) the aggregate amount recommended by the applicable Investment
Adviser to be invested by such Regulated Fund in the Follow-On
Investment, together with the amount proposed to be invested by the
other Co-Investment Affiliates in the same transaction, exceeds the
amount of the opportunity, then the amount invested by each such party
will be allocated among them pro rata based on each participant's
Available Capital available for investment in the asset class being
allocated, up to the amount proposed to be invested by each.
    (d) The acquisition of Follow-On Investments as permitted by this
condition will be considered a Co-Investment Transaction for all
purposes and subject to the other conditions set forth in the
application.
    9. The Non-Interested Directors of each Regulated Fund will be
provided quarterly for review all information concerning Potential Co-
Investment Transactions and Co-Investment Transactions, including
investments made by any Co-Investment Affiliate that the applicable
Regulated Fund considered but declined to participate in, so that the
Non-Interested Directors may determine whether all investments made
during the preceding quarter, including those investments which such
Regulated Fund considered but declined to participate in, comply with
the conditions of the Order. In addition, the Non-Interested Directors
will consider at least annually the continued appropriateness for the
applicable Regulated Fund of participating in new and existing Co-
Investment Transactions. All information presented to such Regulated
Fund's Board pursuant to this condition will be kept for the life of
such Regulated Fund and at least two years thereafter, and will be
subject to examination by the Commission and its staff.
    10. Each Regulated Fund will maintain the records required by
section 57(f)(3) of the Act as if each of the Regulated Funds were a
BDC and each of the investments permitted under these conditions were
approved by the Required Majority under section 57(f).
    11. No Non-Interested Director of a Regulated Fund also will be a
director, general partner, managing member or principal, or otherwise
an ``affiliated person'' (as defined in the 1940 Act) of any Co-
Investment Affiliate (other than any other Regulated Fund).
    12. The expenses, if any, associated with acquiring, holding or
disposing of any securities acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction
(including, without limitation, the expenses of the distribution of any
such securities registered for sale under the Securities Act) will, to
the extent not payable by the applicable Investment Adviser under its
respective investment advisory agreement with the applicable Regulated
Fund or other Co-Investment Affiliate, be shared by such Regulated Fund
and each Co-Investment Affiliate in proportion to the relative amounts
of the securities held or to be acquired or disposed of, as the case
may be.
    13. Any transaction fee \13\ (including break-up or commitment fees
but excluding broker's fees contemplated by section 17(e) or 57(k) of
the Act, as applicable) received in connection with a Co-Investment
Transaction will be distributed to the participating applicable
Regulated Fund and the Co-Investment Affiliates on a pro rata basis
based on the amounts they invested or committed, as the case may be, in
such Co-Investment Transaction. If any transaction fee is to be held by
the Investment Advisers of Co-Investment Affiliates pending
consummation of the transaction, the fee will be deposited into an
account maintained by the Investment Advisers of the Co-Investment
Affiliates at a bank or banks having the qualifications prescribed in
section 26(a)(1) of the Act, and the account will earn a competitive
rate of interest that will also be divided pro rata between such Fund
and the Co-Investment Affiliates based on the amounts they invest in
such Co-Investment Transaction. None of the Co-Investment Affiliates,
their investment advisers, nor any affiliated person (as defined in the
Act) of the Regulated Funds or the Co-Investment Affiliates will
receive additional compensation or remuneration of any kind as a result
of or in connection with a Co-Investment Transaction (other than (a) in
the case of Co-Investment Affiliates, the pro rata transaction fees
described above and fees or other compensation described in condition
2(c)(iii)(C) and (b) in the case of the Investment Advisers, investment
advisory fees paid in accordance with the agreements between such
Investment Advisers and the Co-Investment Affiliates).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Applicants are not requesting any relief for transaction
fees received in connection with any Co-Investment Transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. The Capital Markets Affiliates will not be permitted to invest
in a Potential Co-Investment Transaction except to the extent the
demand from the Regulated Funds and the other Co-Investment Affiliates
is less than the total investment opportunity.
    15. The Investment Advisers will maintain written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to ensure compliance with the foregoing
Conditions. These policies and procedures will require, among other
things, that each of the applicable Investment Advisers will be
notified of

all Potential Co-Investment Transactions that fall within each
Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies and will be
given sufficient information to make its independent determination and
recommendations under conditions 1, 2(a), 7 and 8.
    16. If the Holders own in the aggregate more than 25 percent of the
Shares of a Regulated Fund, then the Holders will vote such Shares as
directed by an independent third party (such as the trustee of a voting
trust or a proxy adviser) when voting on (1) the election of directors;
(2) the removal of one or more directors; or (3) any matters requiring
approval by the vote of a majority of the outstanding voting
securities, as defined in section 2(a)(42) of the Act.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-26401 Filed 11-1-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 9, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 91)]
[Notices]
[Page 26457-26458]
[DOCID:fr09my08-117]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57777; File No. SR-ISE-2008-25]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No.
1, Relating to the Rescission of the ``No MPM'' Order Type

May 5, 2008.
    On March 5, 2008, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``ISE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend its rules governing ISE Stock Exchange to
rescind the ``No MPM'' order type. On March 17, 2008, ISE filed
Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. The proposed rule change,
as modified by Amendment No. 1, was published for comment in the
Federal Register on April 1, 2008.\3\ The Commission received no
comment letters on the proposed rule change. This order approves the
proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57557 (March 26,
2008), 73 FR 17386.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The best bids and offers on the ISE Stock Exchange are displayed to
the marketplace on a continuous basis. In addition, the ISE offers
incoming orders an opportunity to receive price improvement at the
midpoint of the National Best Bid or Offer (``NBBO'') through its
MidPoint Match (``MPM'') process. Specifically, before executing
incoming orders against the ISE's displayed bid or offer, the system
checks MPM to see if there is contra-side interest that can provide
price improvement. However, under ISE's current rules, Equity
Electronic Access Members may specify on orders that they do not want
the orders to execute against MPM interest, thereby denying such orders
the opportunity for price improvement.
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rules 2104 and 2106 to eliminate the
``No MPM'' order type, and to clarify in Rule 2107 that all inbound
orders will be exposed to MPM interest and be afforded price
improvement, when available, before executing against the ISE's
displayed quotations. The Exchange also proposes to amend Rule 2129 to
clarify that MPM is a process by which ISE members may receive an
execution price that is at the midpoint of the NBBO.
    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\4\
Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) \5\ of the Act, which requires that,
among other things, the rules of an exchange be designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, 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.
The Commission believes that exposing all inbound orders to MPM
interest should afford such orders an opportunity for price improvement
by providing customers the opportunity to interact with an additional
source of liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (SR-ISE-2008-25), as modified by
Amendment No. 1, be, and it hereby is, approved.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-10372 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 9, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12973-12974]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5285]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0002]

Neurological Devices Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory
Committee; Amendment of Notice

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an amendment
to the notice of meeting of the Neurological Devices Panel of the
Medical Devices Advisory Committee. This meeting was announced in the
Federal Register of February 7, 2011 (76 FR 6625). The amendment is
being

made to reflect a change in the Agenda portion of the document. There
are no other changes.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Olga I. Claudio, Center for Devices
and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, rm. 1611, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-7608, or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138
(301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC area). Please call the Information
Line for up-to-date information on this meeting.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of February 7, 2011,
FDA announced that a meeting of the Neurological Devices Panel of the
Medical Devices Advisory Committee would be held on March 17 and 18,
2011. On page 6625, in the second column, in the last paragraph, in the
first and second sentences, the ``for the NovoTTF-100A Treatment Kit,
sponsored by Hogan Lovells US LLP for NovoCure, Ltd. The NovoTTF-100A
Treatment Kit'' portion of the document is changed to read as follows:
``for the NovoTTF-100A System, sponsored by NovoCure, Ltd. The NovoTTF-
100A System''.
    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to the advisory committees.

    Dated: March 3, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-5285 Filed 3-8-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 227 (Tuesday, November 28, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 83026-83028]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26017]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0231]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Old River, Between Victoria
Island and Byron Tract, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary interim rule and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is temporarily modifying the operating
schedule that governs the draw of the California Department of
Transportation (Route 4) highway bridge, mile 14.8 between Victoria
Island and Byron Tract, CA. This action is necessary to allow the
bridge owner to complete rehabilitation of the bridge after an
unexpected delay in delivery of custom made electronics.

DATES:
    Effective date: This temporary interim rule is effective from 5
p.m. on November 30, 2023, through 5 p.m. on March 1, 2024.
    Comments: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard
on or before December 28, 2023.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov. Type the
docket number (USCG-2023-0231) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH''. In the Document Type column, select ``Supporting & Related
Material''.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary interim rule, call or email Carl Hausner, Chief, Bridge
Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations [Delete/add any abbreviations not used/used
in this document]

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CADFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Pub. L. Public Law
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary interim rule without
prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under
section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C.
553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without
prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause
finds that those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or
contrary to the public interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because it is
impracticable. This bridge is non-operational and will be non-
operational until rehabilitation work can be completed.
    On October 27, 2022 the Coast Guard issued a General Deviation
which allowed the bridge owner, Caltrans, to deviate from the current
operating schedule in 33 CFR 117.183 to conduct major mechanical and
electrical rehabilitation of the bridge. Due to delays in procuring
materials, vandalism of critical electrical submarine cables, and an
active winter storm season, the project ran past the end date of April
23, 2023 of the General Deviation. The bridge could not be brought back
to operating condition until the delivery of the critical Program Logic
Control circuit and the replacement or repairs to the submarine cable
could be made. On October 17, 2023, Caltrans informed the Coast Guard
that critical electronic components, needed to complete the
rehabilitation of the bridge, were still on back-order and not expected
to be delivered in time for a project completion deadline of November
30, 2023. It is anticipated that

the parts will be delivered in the beginning of next year, the bridge
work complete and the span operational by March 1, 2024. There is
insufficient time to provide a reasonable comment period and then
consider those comments before issuing the modification.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making it effective in less than 30 days after publication
in the Federal Register. For reasons presented above, delaying the
effective date of this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the
public interest due to the fact that the bridge is currently inoperable
and will not be back into operation until the rehabilitation work can
be completed.
    We are soliciting comments on this rulemaking. If the Coast Guard
determines that changes to the temporary interim rule are necessary, we
will publish a temporary final rule or other appropriate document.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary interim rule under
authority in 33 U.S.C. 499. The Coast Guard is modifying the operating
schedule that governs the California Department of Transportation
(Route 4) highway bridge, mile 14.8 between Victoria Island and Byron
Tract, CA. The Caltrans Route 4 highway bridge has a vertical
clearance, in the closed position, of 12.7 feet at mean high water and
unlimited vertical clearance when opened.
    The existing drawbridge regulation, 33 CFR 117.183, states that the
draw of the California Department of Transportation (Route 4) highway
bridge, mile 14.8 between Victoria Island and Byron Tract, shall open
on signal if at least four hours notice is given to the drawtender at
the Rio Vista bridge across the Sacramento River, mile 12.8. Caltrans,
the bridge owner, has requested this modification as additional time is
required to complete the bridge rehabilitation.
    Drawtender logs, during a previous test deviation conducted May 5,
2021 to August 7, 2021, recorded the following number of CADFW vessel
openings: four in May, eight in June, four in July, and two in August.
One survey vessel passed in July. No recreational or commercial vessels
requested an opening of the bridge span during that 90-day test
deviation.
    On October 27, 2022 the Coast Guard issued a General Deviation
which allowed the bridge owner, Caltrans, to deviate from the current
operating schedule in 33 CFR 117.183 to conduct major mechanical and
electrical rehabilitation of the bridge. Due to various delays, the
project ran past the end date of April 23, 2023 of the General
Deviation. On April 20, 2023, the Coast Guard published a temporary
interim rule with request for comments that extended the deviation from
the operating schedule until November 30, 2023. 88 FR 24336. During the
comment period that ended May 22, 2023, no comments were received.
    On October 17, 2023, Caltrans informed the Coast Guard that
critical electronic components, needed to complete the rehabilitation
of the bridge, were still on back-order and not expected to be
delivered in time for a project completion deadline of November 30,
2023. It is anticipated that the parts will be delivered in the
beginning of next year, the bridge work complete and the span
operational by March 1, 2024. This temporary interim rule allows for a
further deviation from the operating schedule until March 1, 2024.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule, which permits a temporary
deviation from the operating schedule that governs the California
Department of Transportation (Route 4) highway bridge, mile 14.8
between Victoria Island and Byron Tract, CA. This rule allows the
bridge to be secured in the closed-to-navigation position through 5
p.m. on March 1, 2024.
    As part of the rehabilitation of the bridge, Caltrans has removed
and is replacing all the electronics as well as key mechanical
components that control the operation of the swing span. On January 31,
2023, vandals caused damage to one of the three newly installed custom-
made submarine cables. On April 1, 2023 the contractor informed
Caltrans that the custom-made Program Logic Control circuit, which is
the circuit that controls the operation of the swing span, was delayed
due to supply chain issues. These two critical components of bridge
operations, as well as an active storm season, caused the delay of the
completion of the rehabilitation of the bridge. On October 17, 2023,
Caltrans informed the Coast Guard that critical electronic components,
needed to complete the rehabilitation of the bridge, were still on
back-order and not expected to be delivered to meet the November 30,
2023 deadline to bring the swing span back into operation. It is
anticipated that the parts will be delivered in the beginning of next
year, the bridge work complete and the span operational by March 1,
2024. Currently, the swing span remains inoperable until rehabilitation
work is completed. The anticipated completion of the rehabilitation
work is March 1, 2024.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this temporary interim rule after considering numerous
statutes and Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize
our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866, as amended by
Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review). Accordingly, it
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the fact that
little or no commercial or recreational vessel traffic will be impacted
by this rule. Furthermore, the swing span of the bridge, as of date of
the publication of this rule, is not operational and cannot resume
operations until delivery of delayed parts and the repair to or
replacement of the vandalized electrical submarine cable is made.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A
above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have Tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or Tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01, Rev.1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning Policy COMDTINST 5090.1
(series) which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f). The
Coast Guard has determined that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This rule promulgates the operating
regulations or procedures for drawbridges and is categorically excluded
from further review, under paragraph L49, of Chapter 3, Table 3-1 of
the U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementation Procedures.
    Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum
for the Record are required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 00170.1. Revision No. 01.3

Sec.  117.183  [Amended]

0
2. Section 117.183 is stayed from November 30, 2023, until 5 p.m. on
March 1, 2024.

0
3. Add section Sec.  117.T184 to read as follows:

Sec.  117.T184  Old River.

    The draw of the California Department of Transportation (Route 4)
highway bridge, mile 14.8 between Victoria Island and Byron Tract need
not be opened for the passage of vessels.

    Dated: November 20, 2023.
Andrew M. Sugimoto,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2023-26017 Filed 11-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: July 16, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 137)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 40720-40721]
[DOCID:fr16jy08-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0092; Airspace Docket No. 07-AAL-18]

Establishment of Colored and VOR Federal Airways; Alaska

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes four Federal airways in the National
Airspace System (NAS) to replace four non-part 95 routes in Alaska. The
routes consist of three Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range (VOR)
Federal airways, and one Low/Medium Frequency (L/MF) Colored Federal
airway in Alaska. The conversion of these non-part 95 routes would
change uncharted nonregulatory airways requiring special aircrew
authorization to Federal Airways, thus adding to the instrument flight
rules (IFR) airway and route infrastructure in Alaska. The addition of
these routes improves the management of air traffic operations and
thereby enhances safety. A minor change to the description of V-619
also is being made.

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, September 25, 2008. The Director of
the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action
under 1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9
and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken McElroy, Airspace and Rules Group,
Office of System Operations Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On March 25, 2008, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish four Federal Airways
in

Alaska (73 FR 15685). Interested parties were invited to participate in
this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on this proposal.
No comments were received in response to the NPRM. Based on further
analysis of Air Traffic Control requirements, this rule incorporates
the inclusion of two additional intersections along V-619. The
description of V-619 will include the intersections of the Port Heiden
044[deg] radial and the Saldo 200[deg] radial and the Dillingham
099[deg] radial. With the exception of editorial changes, and the
change described above, this amendment is the same as that proposed in
the NPRM.
    Colored Federal airways and VOR Federal airways are published in
paragraph 6009 and 6010, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9R signed
August 15, 2007 and effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated
by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Colored Federal airways and VOR
Federal airways listed in this document will be published subsequently
in the Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by establishing three VOR Federal airways designated V-351, V-
414, V-619 and one Colored Federal airway designated Amber 6 (A-6), in
Alaska. The FAA is taking this action for the following reasons: (1)
The conversion of these uncharted nonregulatory routes to Federal
airways adds to the IFR airway and route infrastructure in Alaska; (2)
pilots will be provided with minimum en route altitudes and minimum
obstruction clearance altitude information; (3) this amendment
establishes controlled airspace, thus eliminating some of the
commercial IFR operations in uncontrolled airspace; and (4) the
addition of these routes improves the management of air traffic
operations and thereby enhances safety.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant
preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so
minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air
traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule,
when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
subtitle VII, part A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it will enhance aviation safety in the state of Alaska.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, Environmental Impacts: Polices and Procedures.
This airspace action is not expected to cause any potentially
significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances
exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9R,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 15, 2007, and
effective September 15, 2007, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6009(c) Amber Federal Airways.

* * * * *

A-6 [New]

St. Marys, AK, NDB; to North River, AK, NDB
* * * * *

Paragraph 6010(b) VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-351 [New]

From Port Heiden, AK, NDB/DME; to Dillingham, AK, VOR/DME
* * * * *

V-619 [New]

From Port Heiden, AK, NDB/DME; via the INT of Port Heiden, AK, NDB/
DME 044[deg] and Saldo, AK, NDB 200[deg] bearings; to Saldo, AK,
NDB; to the Dillingham, AK, VOR/DME 099[deg] radial/47[deg] DME; to
Dillingham, AK, VOR/DME
* * * * *

V-414 [New]

From Gambell, AK, NDB/DME; to Kukuliak, AK, VOR/DME
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 2, 2008.
Kenneth McElroy,
Acting Manager, Airspace and Rules Group.
[FR Doc. E8-15934 Filed 7-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 77 (Friday, April 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 24612]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08470]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Staff Attendance at North American Electric Reliability
Corporation Standard Drafting Team Meeting

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hereby gives notice that
members of the Commission and/or Commission staff may attend the
following meetings:

North American Electric Reliability Corporation Project 2021-07 Extreme
Cold Weather Grid Operations, Preparedness, and Coordination Standard
Drafting Team Meeting on: May 2, 2023 (1:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m. eastern
time)

    Further information regarding these meetings may be found at:
https://www.nerc.com/Pages/Calendar.aspx.
    The discussions at the meetings, which are open to the public, may
address matters at issue in the following Commission proceeding:

Docket No. RD23-1-000 Extreme Cold Weather Reliability Standards EOP-
011-3 and EOP-012-1

    For further information, please contact Chanel Chasanov, 202-502-
8569, or [email protected].

    Dated: April 17, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-08470 Filed 4-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 27 (Tuesday, February 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7455-7457]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02684]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP15-29-000]

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC; Notice of Intent To
Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Gulf Trace
Expansion Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the Gulf Trace Expansion Project
involving construction and operation of facilities by Transcontinental
Gas Pipe Line company, LLC (Transco) in Cameron, Calcasieu, Beauregard,
Evangeline, and East Feliciana Parishes, Louisiana. The Commission will
use this EA in its decisionmaking process to determine whether the
project is in the public convenience and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies on the project. Your input will help the Commission staff
determine what issues they need to evaluate in the EA. Please note that
the scoping period will close on March 6, 2015.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives should notify their constituents of this

proposed project and encourage them to comment on their areas of
concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company
representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to
construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. The company
would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. However, if
the Commission approves the project, that approval conveys with it the
right of eminent domain. Therefore, if easement negotiations fail to
produce an agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation
proceedings where compensation would be determined in accordance with
state law.
    Transco provided landowners with a fact sheet prepared by the FERC
entitled ``An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I
Need To Know?'' This fact sheet addresses a number of typically-asked
questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate
in the Commission's proceedings. It is also available for viewing on
the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov).

Summary of the Proposed Project

    The Gulf Trace Expansion Project would provide about 1.2 million
standard cubic feet of natural gas per day from its Station 65 Zone 3
Pool in St. Helena Parish, Louisiana, southward along its existing
mainline, existing Southwest Louisiana Lateral, and the proposed
project facilities to Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC liquefied natural
gas terminal (SPLNG Terminal) in Cameron Parish, Louisiana. The
pipeline would extend from a tie-in with the existing NHI Laterals C
and D to SPLNG Terminal.
    The Gulf Trace Expansion Project would consist of the following
facilities:
     About 6.97 miles of 36-inch-diameter pipeline (the Gulf
Trace Lateral) in Cameron Parish;
     addition of two 16,000 horsepower (hp) gas turbine-driven
compressor units at Transco's existing Compressor Station 44 in Cameron
Parish;
     two 16,000 hp gas turbine-driven compressor units at the
new Compressor Station 42 at the junction of the Transco's mainline and
its Southwest Louisiana Lateral in Calcasieu Parish;
     piping and valve modifications on Transco's mainline at
existing Compressor Stations 45, 50, and 60 in Beauregard, Evangeline,
and East Feliciana Parishes to allow for bi-directional flow;
     two new meter stations, one adjacent to the SPLNG Terminal
in Cameron Parish (SPLNG Meter Station) and one adjacent to the Texas
Gas Interconnection in Evangeline Parish (Duralde Meter Station);
     piping and valve modifications, and pig launcher and
receivers required to tie-in the Gulf Trace Lateral with the existing
NHI Laterals C and D at the milepost 6.8 valve site \1\ in Cameron
Parish; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A ``pig'' is a tool that the pipeline company inserts into
and pushes through the pipeline for cleaning the pipeline,
conducting internal inspections, or other purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     appurtenant underground and aboveground facilities.
    The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix
1.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The appendices referenced in this notice will not appear in
the Federal Register. Copies of appendices were sent to all those
receiving this notice in the mail and are available at www.ferc.gov
using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, or call
(202) 502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to
the last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the proposed facilities would disturb about 263.4
acres of land for the aboveground facilities and the pipeline.
Following construction, Transco would maintain about 75.6 acres for
permanent operation of the project's facilities; the remaining acreage
would be restored and revert to former uses. About 17 percent of the
proposed pipeline route parallels existing pipeline, utility, or road
rights-of-way.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
\3\ to discover and address concerns the public may have about
proposals. This process is referred to as ``scoping.'' The main goal of
the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public
comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. We will
consider all filed comments during the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``We,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction and operation of the proposed project under these
general headings:
     Geology and soils;
     land use;
     water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
     cultural resources;
     vegetation and wildlife including migratory birds;
     air quality and noise;
     endangered and threatened species; and
     public safety.
    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed
project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to
lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    The EA will present our independent analysis of the issues. The EA
will be available in the public record through eLibrary. Depending on
the comments received during the scoping process, we may also publish
and distribute the EA to the public for an allotted comment period. We
will consider all comments on the EA before making our recommendations
to the Commission. To ensure we have the opportunity to consider and
address your comments, please carefully follow the instructions in the
Public Participation section beginning on page 5.
    With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction by law
and/or special expertise with respect to the environmental issues of
this project to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the
EA.\4\ Agencies that would like to request cooperating agency status
should follow the instructions for filing comments provided under the
Public Participation section of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing
cooperating agency responsibilities are at Title 40, Code of Federal
Regulations, part 1501.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultation
with the applicable State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and to
solicit their views and those of other government agencies, interested
Indian tribes, and the public on the project's potential effects on
historic properties.\5\ We will define the project-specific Area of
Potential Effects (APE) in consultation with the SHPO as the project
develops. On natural gas

facility projects, the APE at a minimum encompasses all areas subject
to ground disturbance (examples include construction right-of-way,
contractor/pipe storage yards, compressor stations, and access roads).
Our EA for this project will document our findings on the impacts on
historic properties and summarize the status of consultations under
section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, part 800. Those
regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Currently Identified Environmental Issues

    We have already identified several issues that we think deserve
attention based on a preliminary review of the proposed facilities and
the environmental information provided by Transco. This preliminary
list of issues may be changed based on your comments and our analysis.
These include impacts on:
     Wetlands and waterbodies;
     wildlife;
     migratory birds;
     vegetation;
     threatened or endangered species;
     land use;
     air quality;
     noise; and
     safety.

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the project. Your comments should focus on
the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and
measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific
your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your
comments are timely and properly recorded, please send your comments so
that the Commission receives them in Washington, DC on or before March
6, 2015.
    For your convenience, there are three methods which you can use to
submit your comments to the Commission. In all instances please
reference the project docket number (CP15-29-000) with your submission.
The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert
staff available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for interested persons to
submit brief, text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically using the eFiling
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a
variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission.
New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on
``eRegister.'' You must select the type of filing you are making. If
you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select
``Comment on a Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC
20426.

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits
comments on the project. We will update the environmental mailing list
as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related
to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
proposed project.
    If we publish and distribute the EA, copies will be sent to the
environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you would
prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD
version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please
return the attached Information Request (appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in
the User's Guide under the ``e-filing'' link on the Commission's Web
site.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC Web site at www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP15-
29). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

    Dated: February 4, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-02684 Filed 2-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P