[Federal Register: May 6, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 88)]
[Notices]
[Page 25068-25070]
[DOCID:fr06my08-122]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57734; File No. SR-CHX-2008-05]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
to Change the Composition of its Regulatory Oversight Committee

April 29, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on April 21, 2008, the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (``CHX'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange.
The Exchange has designated this proposal as non-controversial under
Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend its rules to change the composition
of the Regulatory Oversight Committee (``ROC'' or ``Committee'') so
that this group consists of at least five Public Directors and to allow
the Exchange's Vice Chairman to appoint, and the Public Directors on
the Exchange's Board of Directors to approve, up to two Participant
Directors to serve as non-voting advisors to the Committee. The text of
this proposed rule change is available at the CHX, on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.chx.com/rules/proposed_rules.html, and in the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the CHX included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange 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
    Under its existing rules, the Exchange's ROC consists of seven
persons--five Public Directors and two Participant Directors.\5\ One of
the Participant Directors must be associated with a firm that is
primarily engaged in business on the Exchange's trading floor.\6\ The
other Participant Director must be associated with a participant firm
that is not primarily engaged in business on the Exchange's trading
floor.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See CHX Rules, Article 2, Rule 4. Under the Exchange's
bylaws, a Public Director is a director who (i) Is not a
participant, or an officer, managing member, partner or employee of
a participant firm; (ii) is not an employee of the CHX or any of its
affiliates; (iii) is not a broker or dealer that is registered under
the Act, or an officer or employee of a broker or dealer that is
registered under the Act; or (iv) does not have any other material
business relationship with (a) CHX, CHX Holdings or any of their
affiliates or (b) any broker or dealer that is registered under the
Act. A Participant Director is a participant or an officer, managing
member or partner of a participant firm. See CHX Bylaws, Article II,
Section 2(b). The Commission recently approved a proposed rule
change by CHX to amend the definition of Public Director in its
bylaws to refer to brokers or dealers registered under the Act. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57699 (April 23, 2008), 73 FR
23287 (April 29, 2008) (SR-2008-CHX-02).
    \6\ This director is called an ``On-Floor Participant Director''
in the current rule. See CHX Rules, Article 2, Rule 4.
    \7\ This director is called ``Off-Floor Participant Director''
in the current rule. See CHX Rules, Article 2, Rule 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Through this proposal, the Exchange would modify the composition of
the ROC so that it would consist of at least five Public Directors. The
Exchange would also amend its rules to allow the Exchange's Vice
Chairman to appoint, and the Public Directors on the Exchange's Board
of Directors to approve, up to two Participant Directors to serve as
non-voting advisors to the Committee.
    These proposed changes serve several purposes. First, the changes
would eliminate references to the Exchange's trading floor when
describing the Participant Directors who can serve on the ROC. In the
Exchange's new trading model, the Exchange no longer operates a
physical trading floor, so these distinctions are no longer
particularly useful in distinguishing between Participant Directors.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Exchange fully transitioned to its new trading model on
January 26, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an additional matter, the changes would modify the role that
Participant Directors play on the ROC--instead of being voting members
of the ROC, the Participant Directors would serve as non-voting
advisors. This status would allow the Participant Directors to share
insights that might prove helpful to the ROC in its oversight of the
Exchange's regulatory programs, but would not allow the Participant
Directors to vote on issues that may arise.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange believes that a non-voting, advisory role for
Participant Directors is more consistent with the Commission's
proposed self-regulatory organization (``SRO'') governance rules,
which, if approved, would require that each SRO's ROC be composed
entirely of independent (or public) directors, but that would not,
at least on its face, prohibit an SRO from appointing an advisory
group of members to work with the ROC. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 50699 (November 18, 2004), 69 FR 71126 (December 8,
2004) (S7-39-04). Although these proposals have not been approved as
final rules, the Exchange believes that they provide strong
guidelines for SROs to consider as they review their internal
governance structures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the changes would provide some flexibility in the number
of persons who must serve on the ROC to better allow the Exchange to
respond to changes over time. By allowing the ROC to be composed of
``at least'' five Public Directors, the Exchange's Vice Chairman would
be able to appoint, and the Public Directors on the Exchange's Board
would be able to approve, some or even all of its Public Directors to
the ROC, as the Board believes is appropriate. Similarly, by allowing
the Exchange's Vice Chairman to appoint, and the Public Directors on
the Exchange's Board to approve, ``up to'' two Participant Directors to
serve as advisors to the ROC, the Exchange's Board would be able to
determine how many non-voting advisors are appropriate at a particular
time. This flexibility would also allow the Board to be sensitive,
within reasonable bounds, to the availability of its Board members to
serve on committees--the proposal would allow the Exchange's Vice
Chairman to appoint, and the Public Directors on the Exchange's Board
to approve, five, six or seven Public Directors to the ROC, for
example, depending upon each director's ability to dedicate time to the
ROC's activities.
    The ROC's composition is not described solely in the Exchange's
rules; it is also set out in the 2003 settlement agreement that the
Exchange entered into with the Commission.\10\ The Exchange asked the
Commission to amend the Order to incorporate this new composition for
the ROC; this rule filing is designed to effectuate the changes to the
Order approved by the Commission.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 48566 (September
30, 2003) (Administrative Proceeding File No. 3-11282) (``Order'').
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57605 (April 2,
2008) (Administrative Proceeding File No. 3-11282).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 2. Statutory Basis
    The CHX believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b).\12\ The proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \13\ because it would
promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to,
and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, protect investors and the public
interest by permitting the Exchange to make reasonable modifications to
the required composition of its ROC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received.

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

    Because the proposed rule change: (i) Does not significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not
impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) does not become
operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such shorter
time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \14\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). Pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
under the Act, the Exchange is required to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the

Act \16\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \17\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The CHX has
requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because it will allow the Exchange to implement the changes to the ROC
without delay.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \18\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the impact of the proposed rule on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed 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, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CHX-2008-05 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CHX-2008-05. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). 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, on official business
days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also
will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of
the CHX. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CHX-
2008-05 and should be submitted on or before May 27, 2008.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-9866 Filed 5-5-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


                 United States Environmental Protection Agency                                                                        Docket Index for                             [EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0495]                                         Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans,  State of Nevada, Clark County Department of Air Quality and Environmental Management, New Source Review

      	Docket Index  Category/ Item 	Number

Category I.  State Implementation Plan Revision Submittals and Related Materials

# SIP submittal letter from NDEP dated April 1, 2014 I-A # Proposed Revision to Clark County Part of Nevada State Implementation Plan: Revisions to Clark County Air Quality Regulations Sections 0, 12.0, 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, & 12.4, Repeal of Sections 1, 11, & 24, and Incorporation of Section 12.7.5, dated March 21, 2014 I-B

Category II.  Federal Register Notices Relied on for Proposed Rule

   # 47 FR 26386 (June 18, 1982)  II-A    # 75 FR 45485 (August 3, 2010)  II-B    # 75 FR 64864 (October 20, 2010) II-C    # 76 FR 17548 (March 30, 2011) II-D    # 77 FR 28424 (May 14, 2012) II-E    # 77 FR 43206 (July 11, 2012) II-F    # 77 FR 64039 (October 18, 2012) II-G    # 78 FR 1149 (February 7, 2013) II-H    # 78 FR 73698 (December 9, 2013) II-I

Category III.	Other Relevant Documents

# TSD for NPRM for Clark County rule revisions, dated June 16, 2014 III-A # Clark Section 0, dated March 18, 2014 III-B # Clark Section 12.0, dated March 18, 2014 III-C # Clark Section 12.1, dated March 18, 2014 III-D # Clark Section 12.2, dated March 18, 2014 III-E # Clark Section 12.3, dated March 18, 2014 III-F # Clark Section 12.4, dated March 18, 2014 III-G # Clark Section 12.7, dated x III-H # Clark Section 1, (Repealed 3/18/14) III-I # Clark Section 11, (Repealed 4/5/11) III-J # Clark Section 24, (Repealed 3/16/10) III-K

IV.	EPA Rulemaking Documents

# Federal Register Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,  IV-A # Federal Register Notice of Interim Final Determination IV-B #


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 204 (Monday, October 22, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53329-53334]
[FR Doc No: 2018-22894]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 33271; 812-14931]

Blackstone Real Estate Income Fund, et al.

October 16, 2018.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of application for an order under sections 17(d) 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) and 57(a)(4) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act.
    Summary of Application: Applicants request an order to permit
business development companies (``BDCs'') and closed-end management
investment companies to co-invest in portfolio companies with each
other and with certain affiliated investment funds and accounts.
    Applicants: Blackstone Real Estate Income Fund (``BREIF'');
Blackstone Real Estate Income Fund (``BREIF II''); Blackstone Real
Estate Income Master Fund (``BREI Master Fund,'' and, together with
BREIF and BREIF II, the ``BREI Regulated Funds''); Blackstone Real
Estate Income Advisors L.L.C. (``BREIA''), the investment adviser to
the BREI Regulated Funds; the investment advisers set forth in Schedule
A to the application (together with BREIA, the ``Blackstone RE
Advisers''); and the Existing Affiliated Funds set forth on Schedule A
to the application.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Existing Affiliated Funds, together with their direct
and indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries, are entities (i) whose
primary investment adviser is a Blackstone RE Adviser and (ii) that
either (A) would be an investment company but for section 3(c)(1),
3(c)(5)(C) or 3(c)(7) of the Act or (B) rely on the rule 3a-7
exemption thereunder from investment company status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Filing Dates: The application was filed on July 20, 2018.
    Applicants have agreed to file an amendment during the notice
period, the substance of which is reflected in this notice.
    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 12, 2018, 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: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
St, NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants: Leon Volchyok, Esq., 345
Park Avenue, New York, New York 10154.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Asen Parachkevov, Senior Counsel, or
David J. Marcinkus, 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 website 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. Each BREI Regulated Fund is a Delaware statutory trust and is
structured as an externally managed, non-diversified, closed-end
management investment company. Each BREI Regulated Fund's investment
objective is to seek long-term total return, with an emphasis on
current income, by primarily investing in a broad range of real estate-
related deb investments. BREIF and BREIF II are ``feeder'' funds in a
``master-feeder'' structure and pursues their respective investment
objective by investing substantially all of their assets in the BREI
Master Fund. Each BREI Regulated Fund has a five-member Board, of which
four members are Non-Interested Trustees.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``Board'' means the board of trustees (or equivalent) of the
BREI Regulated Funds and any other Regulated Fund (as defined
below).
    ``Non-Interested Trustees'' means the Non-Interested Trustees of
the BREI Regulated Funds and any other Regulated Fund who are not
``interested persons'' within the meaning of section 2(a)(19) of the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Each Adviser \3\ is a subsidiary of The Blackstone Group, L.P.
(``Blackstone''). Blackstone is a leading global alternative asset
manager, whose alternative asset management businesses include
investment vehicles focused on private equity, real estate, hedge fund
solutions, non-investment grade credit, secondary private equity funds
of funds and multi-asset class strategies. Blackstone's four business
segments are (1) private equity, (2) real estate, (3) hedge fund
solutions and (4) credit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Adviser'' means (i) the Blackstone RE Advisers
and (ii) any future investment adviser that controls, is controlled
by or is under common control with a Blackstone RE Adviser and is
registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers
Act of 1940 (the ``Advisers Act'') that intends to participate in
the Co-Investment Program (as defined below).
    The term ``Primary Adviser'' means any future investment adviser
that (i) controls, is controlled by or is under common control with
an Adviser, (ii) is registered as an investment adviser under the
Advisers Act, and (iii) is not an Adviser. For the avoidance of
doubt, a Primary Adviser will not be treated as an Adviser under the
requested Order, but will be subject to conditions 2(c)(iv) and 13
of the requested Order. A Primary Adviser will not rely on the
requested Order with respect to any investment vehicles it manages
other than to the extent those vehicles are sub-advised by an
Adviser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. The Blackstone RE Advisers operate as a self-contained advisory
business within Blackstone's real estate.

Each Blackstone RE Adviser is under common control with BREIA, the
Adviser to each of the BREI Regulated Funds, and collectively they
conduct a single advisory business for purposes of the requested Order.
The Blackstone RE Advisers are each either separately registered as
investment advisers with the Commission, or are relying advisers that
rely on the registration of another Blackstone RE Adviser. No
Blackstone RE Adviser is a relying adviser of any Blackstone-affiliated
investment adviser from outside of the self-contained group.
    4. Applicants seek an order to permit one or more Regulated Funds
\4\ to be able to participate with one or more other Regulated Funds
and/or one or more Affiliated Investors \5\ in the same investment
opportunities through a proposed 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 thereunder (the ``Co-Investment
Program'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Regulated Fund'' means any of the BREI Regulated Funds and
any future closed-end management investment company (i) that has
elected to be regulated as a business development company (``BDC'')
or is registered under the Act, (ii) whose investment adviser is an
Adviser and (iii) who intends to participate in the Co-Investment
Program.
     Section 2(a)(48) of the Act 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.
    \5\ ``Affiliated Investor'' means (i) the Existing Affiliated
Funds, (ii) any Affiliated Proprietary Account and (iii) any Future
Affiliated Fund.
    ``Future Affiliated Fund'' means an entity (i)(A) whose
investment adviser is an Adviser or (B) whose investment adviser is
a Primary Adviser and whose sub-adviser is an Adviser (a ``Sub-
Advised Affiliated Fund''), and (ii) that either (A) would be an
investment company but for an exemption in section 3(c)(1),
3(c)(5)(C) or 3(c)(7) of the Act or (B) relies on the rule 3a-7
exemption thereunder from investment company status, and (iii) that
intends to participate in the Co-Investment Program.
    ``Affiliated Proprietary Account'' means any account of an
Adviser or its affiliates or any company that is an indirect,
wholly- or majority-owned subsidiary of an Adviser or its
affiliates, which, from time to time, may hold various financial
assets in a principal capacity. For the avoidance of doubt, neither
the Regulated Funds, the Existing Affiliated Funds nor any Future
Affiliated Funds shall be deemed to be Affiliated Proprietary
Accounts for purposes of the requested Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. For purposes of the requested Order, ``Co-Investment
Transaction'' means any transaction in which one or more Regulated
Funds (or one or more Wholly-Owned Investment Subsidiaries, as defined
below) participates together with one or more other Regulated Funds (or
one or more Wholly-Owned Investment Subsidiaries, as defined below)
and/or one or more Affiliated Investors in reliance on the requested
Order. ``Potential Co-Investment Transaction'' means any investment
opportunity in which a Regulated Fund (or its Wholly-Owned Investment
Subsidiary, as defined below) could not participate together with one
or more Affiliated Investors and/or one or more other Regulated Funds
without obtaining and relying on the requested Order.\6\ Funds that are
advised or sub-advised by affiliates of Blackstone other than an
Adviser or Primary Adviser will not participate in the Co-Investment
Program. No Primary Adviser will be the source of any Potential Co-
Investment Transactions under the requested Order. Potential Co-
Investment Transactions will not be shared outside of the Co-Investment
Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ All existing entities that currently intend to rely upon the
requested Order have been named as applicants. Any other existing or
future entity that subsequently relies on the Order will comply with
the terms and conditions of the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Applicants state that a Regulated Fund may, from time to time,
form a special purpose subsidiary (a ``Wholly-Owned Investment
Subsidiary'').\7\ A Wholly-Owned Investment Subsidiary would be
prohibited from investing in a Co-Investment Transaction with another
Regulated Fund or any Affiliated Investor because it would be a company
controlled by its parent Regulated Fund for purposes of sections 17(d)
and 57(a)(4) of the Act and rule 17d-1 thereunder. Applicants request
that a Wholly-Owned Investment Subsidiary be permitted to participate
in Co-Investment Transactions in lieu of the applicable Regulated Fund
and that the Wholly-Owned Investment Subsidiary's participation in any
such transaction be treated, for purposes of the requested Order, as
though the parent Regulated Fund were participating directly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``Wholly-Owned Investment Subsidiary'' means an (i) whose
sole business purpose is to hold one or more investments on behalf
of a 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)); (ii) that 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); (iii) with respect to
which the Board of the Regulated Fund has the sole authority to make
all determinations with respect to the Wholly-Owned Investment
Subsidiary's participation under the conditions of the requested
Order; and (iv) that is an entity that would be an investment
company but for an exemption in section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the
Act.
    The term ``SBIC Subsidiary'' means a Wholly-Owned Investment
Subsidiary that is licensed by the Small Business Administration
(the ``SBA'') to operate under the Small Business Investment Act of
1958, as amended, (the ``SBA Act'') as a small business investment
company (a ``SBIC'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. When considering Potential Co-Investment Transactions for any
Regulated Fund, an Adviser will consider only the Objectives and
Strategies,\8\ Board-Established Criteria,\9\ investment policies,
investment positions, capital available for investment, and other
pertinent factors applicable to that Regulated Fund. The participation
of a Regulated Fund in a Potential Co-Investment Transaction may only
be approved by a Required Majority, as defined in section 57(o) of the
Act (a ``Required Majority''), of the trustees of the Board eligible to
vote on that Co-Investment Transaction under section 57(o) of the Act
(the ``Eligible Trustees'').\10\ When selecting investments for the
Affiliated Investors, an Adviser will select investments separately for
each Affiliated Investor, considering, in each case, only the
investment objective, investment policies, investment position, capital
available for investment, and other pertinent factors applicable to
that particular Affiliated Investor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The term ``Objectives and Strategies'' means a Regulated
Fund's investment objectives and strategies, as described in the
filings made with the Commission by the Regulated Fund under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the Securities Act of
1933, as amended (the ``1933 Act'') and the Act, and the Regulated
Fund's reports to shareholders.
    \9\ The term ``Board-Established Criteria'' means criteria that
the Board of the applicable Regulated Fund may establish from time
to time to describe the characteristics of Potential Co-Investment
Transactions regarding which an Adviser to the Regulated Fund should
be notified under condition 1 of the requested Order. The Board-
Established Criteria will be consistent with the Regulated Fund's
then-current Objectives and Strategies. If no Board-Established
Criteria are in effect, then the Regulated Fund's Adviser will be
notified of all Potential Co-Investment Transactions that fall
within the Regulated Fund's then current Objectives and Strategies.
Board-Established Criteria will be objective and testable, meaning
that they will be based on observable information, such as industry/
sector of the issuer, minimum earnings before interest, taxes,
depreciation, and amortization of the issuer, asset class of the
investment opportunity or required commitment size, and not on
characteristics that involve discretionary assessment. The Adviser
to the Regulated Fund may from time to time recommend criteria for
the applicable Board's consideration, but Board-Established Criteria
will only become effective if approved by a majority of the Non-
Interested Trustees. The Non-Interested Trustees of a Regulated Fund
may at any time rescind, suspend or qualify its approval of any
Board-Established Criteria, though Applicants anticipate that, under
normal circumstances, the Board would not modify these criteria more
often than quarterly.
    \10\ The defined terms Eligible Trustees and Required Majority
apply as if each Regulated Fund were a BDC subject to section 57(o)
of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. With respect to participation in a Potential Co-Investment
Transaction by a Regulated Fund, the application Adviser will present
each Potential Co-

Investment Transaction and the proposed allocation of each investment
opportunity to the Eligible Trustees. The Required Majority of a
Regulated Fund will approve each Co-Investment Transaction prior to any
investment by the Regulated Fund.
    9. Applicants state that the majority of the Blackstone RE
Advisers' employees work on matters for Close Affiliates \11\ and
information about potential investment opportunities is routinely
disseminated among such Adviser's employees. Other than to satisfy
compliance obligations, information regarding Potential Co-Investment
Transactions will not be shared with Remote Affiliates,\12\ which would
include other investment advisers that operate in other Blackstone
business groups, except in unusual circumstances, as the Blackstone
business groups each generally target different investment strategies
or asset classes and there are information barrier policies in place
between the Blackstone business groups. Applicants further note within
the Blackstone RE Advisers, the personnel overlap and coordination
among portfolio management teams ensures that all relevant investment
opportunities will be brought to the attention of each Regulated Fund
(as defined below) managed by the respective Adviser. Applicants submit
that the Blackstone RE Advisers will receive all information regarding
all investment opportunities that fall within the then-current
Objectives and Strategies and Board-Established Criteria of each
Regulated Fund managed by the respective Adviser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The term ``Close Affiliate'' means the Advisers, the
Regulated Funds, the Affiliated Investors and any other person
described in section 57(b) of the Act (after giving effect to rule
57b-1 thereunder) in respect of any Regulated Fund (treating any
registered investment company or series thereof as a BDC for this
purpose) except for limited partners included solely by reason of
the reference in section 57(b) to section 2(a)(3)(D) of the Act.
    \12\ The term ``Remote Affiliate'' means any person described in
section 57(e) of the Act in respect of any Regulated Fund (treating
any registered investment company or series thereof as a BDC for
this purpose) and any limited partner holding 5% or more of the
relevant limited partner interests that would be a Close Affiliate
but for the exclusion in that definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. Applicants submit that, in the event that a Potential Co-
Investment Transaction would be within the investment objectives and
strategies of the Sub-Advised Affiliated Fund, the respective Adviser
shall have the primary responsibility for the investment, including
making the initial investment recommendation, and day-to-day monitoring
of the investment. Applicants further note that the Adviser will be
responsible for complying with the conditions of the requested Order.
Applicants state that if the Adviser and Primary Adviser agree that the
Sub-Advised Affiliated Fund should invest in the Potential Co-
Investment Transaction and at what size of investment, then the Adviser
would, consistent with the conditions of the requested Order, determine
an allocation for the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Investors,
including such Sub-Advised Affiliated Fund.
    11. Applicants acknowledge that some of the Affiliated Investors
may not be funds advised by an Adviser because they are Affiliated
Proprietary Accounts. Applicants do not believe the participation of
these Affiliated Proprietary Accounts in Co-Investment Transactions
should raise issues under the conditions of the requested Order because
allocation policies and procedures of the account owners provide that
investment opportunities are offered to client accounts before they are
offered to Affiliated Proprietary Accounts.
    12. Under condition 14, if an Adviser or its principals, or any
person controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the
Adviser or its principals, and any Affiliated Investor (collectively,
the ``Holders'') own in the aggregate more than 25 percent of the
outstanding voting shares of a Regulated Fund (``Shares''), then the
Holders will vote such Shares as directed by an independent third party
when voting on (1) the election of directors; (2) the removal of one or
more directors; or (3) all other matters under either the Act or
applicable state law affecting the Board's composition, size or manner
of election.
    13. No Non-Interested Trustee 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.
    Applicants' Legal Analysis:
    1. 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 a BDC in contravention of rules as prescribed by
the Commission. Under section 57(b)(2) of the Act, any person who is
directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under common
control with a BDC is subject to section 57(a)(4) of the Act. Section
57(i) of the Act provides that, until the Commission prescribes rules
under section 57(a)(4) of the Act, the Commission's rules under section
17(d) of the Act applicable to registered closed-end investment
companies will be deemed to apply to transactions subject to section
57(a)(4) of the Act. Because the Commission has not adopted any rules
under section 57(a)(4) of the Act, rule 17d-1 thereunder applies.
    2. 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 unless the
Commission has granted an order permitting such transactions. 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.
    3. Applicants state that certain transactions effected as part of
the Co-Investment Program may be prohibited by sections 17(d) and
57(a)(4) of the Act and rule 17d-1 thereunder without a prior exemptive
order of the Commission to the extent that the Affiliated Investors
fall within the category of persons described by section 17(d) or
section 57(b) of the Act, as modified by rule 57b-1 thereunder with
respect to a Regulated Fund. Applicants believe that the proposed terms
and conditions will ensure would ensure that the conflicts of interest
that section 17(d) and section 57(a)(4) of the Act were designed to
prevent would be addressed and the standards for an order under rule
17d-1 under the Act are met.
    Applicants' Conditions:
    Applicants agree that any Order granting the requested relief shall
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. (a) Each Adviser will establish, maintain and implement policies
and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that each Adviser is
promptly notified, for each Regulated Fund the Adviser manages, of all
Potential Co-Investment Transactions \13\ that (i) an Adviser considers
for any other Regulated Fund or Affiliated Investor and (ii) fall
within the Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies and
Board-Established Criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ No Primary Adviser will be the source of any Potential Co-
Investment Transactions under the requested Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) When an Adviser to a Regulated Fund is notified of a Potential
Co-Investment Transaction under condition 1(a), such Adviser will make
an independent determination of the appropriateness of the investment
for the Regulated Fund in light of the Regulated Fund's then-current
circumstances.

    2. (a) If the Adviser deems a Regulated Fund's participation in any
Potential Co-Investment Transaction to be 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 the applicable Adviser
to be invested by the applicable Regulated Fund in the Potential Co-
Investment Transaction, together with the amount proposed to be
invested by the other participating Regulated Funds and Affiliated
Investors, collectively, in the same transaction, exceeds the amount of
the investment opportunity, then the investment opportunity will be
allocated among them pro rata based on each participant's Available
Capital up \14\ to the amount proposed to be invested by each. The
applicable Adviser will provide the Eligible Trustees of each
participating Regulated Fund with information concerning each
participating party's Available Capital to assist the Eligible Trustees
with their review of the Regulated Fund's investments for compliance
with these allocation procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ ``Available Capital'' means (a) for each Regulated Entity,
the amount of capital available for investment determined based on
the amount of cash on hand, liquidity considerations, existing
commitments and reserves, if any, the targeted leverage level,
targeted asset mix, risk return and target-return profile, tax
implications, regulatory or contractual restrictions or consequences
and other investment policies and restrictions set from time to time
by the Board of the applicable Regulated Entity or imposed by
applicable laws, rules, regulations or interpretations, and (b) for
each Affiliated Investor, the amount of capital available for
investment determined based on the amount of cash on hand, liquidity
considerations, existing commitments and reserves, if any, the
targeted leverage level, targeted asset mix, risk return and target-
return profile, tax implications, regulatory or contractual
restrictions or consequences and other investment policies and
restrictions set from time to time by the Affiliated Investors'
directors, general partners, or adviser or imposed by applicable
laws, rules, regulations or interpretations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) After making the determinations required in conditions 1 and
2(a), the applicable Adviser will distribute written information
concerning the Potential Co-Investment Transaction (including the
amount proposed to be invested by each participating Regulated Fund and
Affiliated Investor) to the Eligible Trustees of each participating
Regulated Fund for their consideration. A Regulated Fund will co-invest
with one or more other Regulated Funds and/or one or more Affiliated
Investors only if, prior to the Regulated Fund's participation in the
Potential Co-Investment Transaction, a Required Majority 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 in respect of
the 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 the Regulated Fund; and
    (B) the Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies;
    (iii) the investment by any other Regulated Funds or Affiliated
Investors would not disadvantage the Regulated Fund, and participation
by the Regulated Fund would not be on a basis different from or less
advantageous than that of other Regulated Funds or Affiliated
Investors; provided that, if any other Regulated Fund or Affiliated
Investor, but not the Regulated Fund itself, 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 Trustees will have the right to ratify the
selection of such director or board observer, if any;
    (B) the applicable Adviser agrees to, and does, provide periodic
reports to the 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 Affiliated Investor or
any Regulated Fund or any affiliated person of any Affiliated Investor
or any Regulated Fund receives in connection with the right of an
Affiliated Investor or a Regulated Fund 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 Affiliated Investors (who each may, in turn,
share its portion with its affiliated persons), and the participating
Regulated Funds in accordance with the amount of each party's
investment; and
    (iv) the proposed investment by the Regulated Fund will not benefit
the Advisers, the Affiliated Investors, the other Regulated Funds or
any Primary Adviser or any affiliated person of any 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 section 17(e) or 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 Adviser will present to the Board of each
Regulated Fund, on a quarterly basis, a record of all investments in
Potential Co-Investment Transactions made by any of the other Regulated
Funds or Affiliated Investors during the preceding quarter that fell
within the Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies and
Board Established Criteria 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 pursuant to this condition will be kept for the life of the
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,\15\ a Regulated Fund will not invest in reliance on the
Order in any issuer in which a Related Party \16\ has an investment.
The Adviser will maintain books and records that demonstrate compliance
with this condition for each Regulated Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ This exception applies only to Follow-On Investments by a
Regulated Fund in issuers in which that Regulated Fund already holds
investments.
    \16\ The term ``Related Party'' means (i) any Close Affiliate
and (ii) in respect of matters as to which any Adviser has
knowledge, any Remote Affiliate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 each participating Regulated Fund and Affiliated
Investor. The grant to an Affiliated Investor or another Regulated
Fund, but not the 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 Affiliated Investor or any Regulated Fund elects to
sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of an interest in a security that
was acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction, the applicable Adviser
will \17\:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Any Affiliated Proprietary Account that is not advised by
an Adviser is itself deemed to be an Adviser for purposes of
Conditions 7(a)(i) and 8(a)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (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 the participating
Affiliated Investors and Regulated Funds.
    (c) A Regulated Fund may participate in such disposition without
obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if: (i) the proposed
participation of each Regulated Fund and each Affiliated Investor 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 the 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 Adviser will provide its written recommendation
as to the Regulated Fund's participation to the Eligible Trustees, 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 Affiliated Investor and each Regulated Fund will bear its
own expenses in connection with any such disposition.
    8. (a) If any Affiliated Investor or any Regulated Fund desires to
make a Follow-On Investment in a portfolio company whose securities
were acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction, the applicable Advisers
will:
    (i) notify each Regulated Fund that participated in the Co-
Investment Transaction of the proposed transaction at the earliest
practicable 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 Regulated Fund and each Affiliated
Investor 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 Adviser
will provide its written recommendation as to the Regulated Fund's
participation to the Eligible Trustees, 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 Regulated
Funds' and the Affiliated Investors' outstanding investments
immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment; and
    (ii) the aggregate amount recommended by the applicable Adviser to
be invested by the applicable Regulated Fund in the Follow-On
Investment, together with the amount proposed to be invested by the
other participating Regulated Funds and Affiliated Investors,
collectively, in the same transaction, exceeds the amount of the
investment opportunity; then the amount invested by each such party
will be allocated among them pro rata based on each party's Available
Capital, 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 Trustees of each Regulated Fund will be
provided quarterly for review all information concerning Potential Co-
Investment Transactions that fell within the Regulated Fund's then-
current Objectives and Strategies and Board-Established Criteria,
including investments in Potential Co-Investment Transactions made by
other Regulated Funds or Affiliated Investors that the Regulated Fund
considered but declined to participate in, and concerning Co-Investment
Transactions in which the Regulated Fund participated, so that the Non-
Interested Trustees may determine whether all Potential Co-Investment
Transactions and Co-Investment Transactions during the preceding
quarter, including those Potential Co-Investment Transactions which the
Regulated Fund considered but declined to participate in, comply with
the conditions of the Order. In addition, the Non-Interested Trustees
will consider at least annually: (a) the continued appropriateness for
the Regulated Fund of participating in new and existing Co-Investment
Transactions, and (b) the continued appropriateness of any Board-
Established Criteria.
    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) of the Act.
    11. No Non-Interested Trustee of a Regulated Fund will also be a
director, general partner, managing member or principal, or otherwise
an ``affiliated person'' (as defined in the Act) of any of the
Affiliated Investors.
    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 1933 Act) will, to the
extent not payable by the Advisers under their respective investment
advisory agreements with Affiliated Investors and the Regulated Funds,
be shared by the Regulated Funds and the Affiliated Investors 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 \18\ (including break-up, structuring,
monitoring 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 Regulated Funds and Affiliated Investors 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 an Adviser pending consummation of the transaction, the fee
will be deposited into an account maintained by the

Adviser 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 among the
participating Regulated Funds and Affiliated Investors based on the
amount they invest in such Co-Investment Transaction. None of the
Advisers, the Primary Advisers, the Affiliated Investors, the other
Regulated Funds nor any affiliated person of the Regulated Funds or
Affiliated Investors 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 the Regulated
Funds and the Affiliated Investors, 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 an Adviser or Primary Adviser,
investment advisory fees paid in accordance with their respective
agreements between the Advisers and the Regulated Fund or Affiliated
Investor).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Applicants are not requesting and the staff is not
providing any relief for transaction fees received in connection
with any Co-Investment Transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. If the Holders own in the aggregate more than 25% of the
Shares, then the Holders will vote such Shares as directed by an
independent third party when voting on (1) the election of trustees;
(2) the removal of one or more trustees; or (3) all other matters under
either the Act or applicable state law affecting the Board's
composition, size or manner of election.
    15. Each Regulated Fund's chief compliance officer, as defined in
rule 38a-1(a)(4) under the Act, will prepare an annual report for its
Board each year that evaluates (and documents the basis of that
evaluation) the Regulated Fund's compliance with the terms and
conditions of the application and the procedures established to achieve
such compliance.
    16. The Affiliated Proprietary Accounts will not be permitted to
invest in a Potential Co-Investment Transaction except to the extent
the aggregate demand from the Regulated Funds and the other Affiliated
Investors is less than the total investment opportunity.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-22894 Filed 10-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: January 3, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 2)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 397-400]
[DOCID:fr03ja08-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0378; Directorate Identifier 2007-SW-04-AD;
Amendment 39-15314; AD 2007-26-12]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Robinson Helicopter Company Models R22,
R22 Alpha, R22 Beta, R22 Mariner, R44 and R44 II Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
the specified Robinson Helicopter Company (Robinson) helicopters. This
action requires a one-time visual inspection for skin separation along
the leading edge of blade skin aft of the skin-to-spar bond line on the
lower surface of each blade and in the tip cap area. This action also
requires a ``tap test'' for detecting a separation or void in both
bonded areas. This action also requires repainting any exposed area of
the blades. If any separation or void is detected, replacing the blade
before further flight is

required. Thereafter, before each flight, this AD also requires
checking for any exposed (bare metal) along the skin-to-spar bond line
on the lower surface of each blade near the tip. If any bare metal is
found, a mechanic must inspect the area. This amendment is prompted by
11 reports of blade debond, some occurring in flight causing the pilot
to feel excessive vibrations and land, and some found during routine
maintenance. The actions specified in this AD are intended to detect
blade skin debond and to prevent blade failure and subsequent loss of
control of the helicopter.

DATES: Effective January 18, 2008.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of January 18, 2008.
    Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before March 3, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this AD:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov
 and follow the instructions for sending your

comments electronically;
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590;
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays; or
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may get the service information identified in this AD from
Robinson Helicopter Company, 2901 Airport Drive, Torrance, CA 90505,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the Docket

    You may examine the docket that contains the AD, any comments, and
other information on the Internet at http://regulations.gov, or in

person at the Docket Management System (DMS) Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
located in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the West Building at the
street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after the DMS receives them.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information relating to the
Robinson R22 helicopter, contact Eric Schrieber, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, Airframe
Branch, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712, telephone
(562) 627-5348, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. For information relating to the
Robinson R44 helicopter, contact Fred Guerin, Aviation Safety Engineer,
FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, Airframe Branch, 3960
Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This amendment adopts a new AD for the
specified Robinson helicopters. This action also requires a one-time
visual inspection for skin separation along the leading edge of the
blade skin aft of the skin-to-spar bond line on the lower surface of
each blade and in the tip cap area. This action also requires a ``tap
test'' for detecting a separation or void in both bonded areas. This AD
also requires repainting any exposed area of the blades. If any
separation or void is detected, replacing the blade before further
flight is required. Thereafter, this action requires, before each
flight, checking for any exposed (bare metal) along the skin-to-spar
bond line on the lower surface of each blade near the tip. If any bare
metal is found, a mechanic must visually inspect the area, perform a
``tap test,'' and remove both blade tip covers and inspect. This
amendment is prompted by 11 reports of blade debond, some occurring in
flight, causing the pilot to feel excessive vibrations and land, and
some found during routine maintenance. In one of the reported
incidents, the debond was caused by corrosion from the lower surface of
the aluminum tip cap, which is bonded to the inside of the blade tip.
The corrosion bubbles caused lifting of the skin and eventual
separation. This condition was found during inspection and not in
flight.
    We have reviewed the following:
     Robinson R22 and R44 Safety Alert, issued on January 4,
2007, revised on March 16, 2007, and March 22, 2007 (Safety Alert);
     Robinson R22 and R44 Service Letter SL-56 and SL-32, dated
March 16, 2007, and Revision A, dated March 29, 2007 (Service Letter);
     Robinson R22 and R44 Service Bulletin SB-96 and SB-61,
both dated March 29, 2007 (Service Bulletin);
     Robinson letter titled ``Additional Information Regarding
Main Rotor Blade Skin Debonding,'' dated May 25, 2007; and
     The Robinson Model R22 and R44 Rotorcraft Flight Manuals
changes to the Normal Procedures Section 4, and Systems Description
Section 7, revised April 20, 2007.
    The latest Safety Alert states in part, ``During each daily
preflight, visually check blade finish along lower surface bond line.
If any bare metal is exposed at or beyond bond line, have blade
refinished per R22 Service Letter SL-56 or Service Letter SL-32 by a
qualified mechanic before further flight.'' The Service Letter,
Revision A, dated March 29, 2007, specifies using 10x magnification to
visually inspect the leading edge of any exposed (bare metal) blade
skin at skin-to-spar bond line. The Service Letter also specifies tap
testing all bare metal skin-to-spar bonded areas. If any tap test
indication of separation or any void is detected, the blade is
unairworthy. The March 16, 2007, Service Letter to R22/R44 owners/
operators, and Service Centers, specifies using a 5x to 10x
magnification for the visual inspection and makes certain changes to
the painting process. Revision A, dated March 29, 2007, to the Service
Letter includes a more accurate drawing of the exposed skin-to-spar
joint area. That Service Letter also includes an inspection for
corrosion around the internal aluminum tip cap area and specifies
painting any bare metal.
    Bond failures have occurred on blades where the protective coatings
have eroded away leaving the skin aft of the bond line at the skin-to-
spar bond line exposed on the lower surface near the tip. Further
erosion of the leading edge of the unprotected skin has caused voids
and skin separation. Bond failures have also occurred due to corrosion
around the tip cap where corrosion residue has disrupted and eventually
separated the bond.
    To attempt to prevent debonding on new blades, the manufacturer has
changed the production process. However, it has not been proven that
these changes will prevent a debond. Therefore, at this time, the FAA
does not consider these newly manufactured blades to provide
terminating action for the requirements of this AD.
    This unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop on other
helicopters of these same type designs. Therefore, this AD is being
issued to detect blade skin debond to prevent blade failure and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.
    This AD requires the following:
     Within 10 hours TIS, unless accomplished previously,
     Using a 10x or higher magnification, visually inspect for
skin separation along the leading edge of any exposed (bare metal)
blade skin aft of the skin-to-spar bond line on the lower surface of
each blade. If there is skin separation, the blade is unairworthy.

     Perform a ``tap test'' to detect any separation or void on
skin-to-spar bonded areas on the lower blade skin aft of the skin-to-
spar bond line of each blade using a 1965 or later U.S. quarter-dollar
coin. If there is any separation or any void, the blade is unairworthy.
     Remove both main rotor blade tip covers. Using a 10x or
higher magnification, visually inspect the blade tip area exposed when
the blade tip covers are removed. ``Tap test'' the skin to cap bond
joints on both upper and lower surfaces of each blade. If any
corrosion, separation, or void is detected, the blade is unairworthy.
     Repaint any exposed area of the blade.
     Before further flight, replace any unairworthy blade with
an airworthy blade.
     Thereafter, if the rotor blade is found airworthy by the
initial inspection, before each flight, visually check for any exposed
(bare metal) skin-to-spar bonded area on the lower surface of each
blade within the outboard 24 inches paying particular attention to the
last 10 inches before the tip. An owner/operator (pilot) holding at
least a private pilot certificate may perform this visual check and
must enter compliance into the aircraft maintenance records in
accordance with 14 CFR 43.11 and 91.417(a)(2)(V). A pilot may perform
this check because it involves only a visual check for any bare metal
in the skin-to-spar bonded area and can be performed equally well by a
pilot or a mechanic. If a pilot finds any area of skin bare metal in
the outboard 24 inches of either blade, before further flight, a
qualified mechanic must comply with the requirements of this AD.
    The repainting must be done by following the specified portions of
the Service Letter described previously.
    The short compliance time involved is required because the
previously described critical unsafe condition can adversely affect the
structural integrity and controllability of the helicopter. Therefore,
the actions described are required before each flight and initially
within 10 hours TIS, both very short time intervals, and this AD must
be issued immediately.
    Since a situation exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this regulation, it is found that notice and opportunity for prior
public comment hereon are impracticable, and that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.
    We estimate that this AD will affect 2290 helicopters. A check
before each flight of each blade will take a minimal amount of time. It
will take about:
     3 work hours to inspect 2 blades; and
     10 work hours to remove and replace a blade for an
estimated 10 blades based on reports of 10 affected blades in the past
2 years.
     The average labor rate is $80 per work hour.
     Required parts will cost about $16,432 for a Model R22
blade, and about $23,060 for a Model R44 blade.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost impact of the AD
on U.S. operators to be $755,060; $549,600 to inspect all the blades;
plus $86,160, to remove and replace 5 of the Model R22 helicopter
blades plus $119,300 to remove and replace 5 of the Model R44
helicopter blades.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements that affect
flight safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for
public comment; however, we invite you to submit any written data,
views, or arguments regarding this AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2007-0378; Directorate
Identifier 2007-SW-04-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of the AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend the AD in light of
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://regulations.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We

will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact
with FAA personnel concerning this AD. Using the search function of our
docket web site, you can find and read the comments to any of our
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment. You
may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD. See the DMS to examine the economic evaluation.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. 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.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding a new airworthiness directive to
read as follows:

2007-26-12 Robinson Helicopter Company: Amendment 39-15314. Docket
No. FAA-2007-0378; Directorate Identifier 2007-SW-04-AD.

Applicability

    Model R22, R22 Alpha, R22 Beta, R22 Mariner helicopters, serial
numbers 0002 through 4100; R44 helicopters, serial

numbers 0001 through 1670; and R44 II helicopters, serial numbers
10001 through 11570, certificated in any category.

Compliance

    Required as indicated.
    To detect main rotor blade (blade) skin debond and prevent blade
failure and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter, do the
following:
    (a) Within 10 hours time-in-service (TIS), unless accomplished
previously:
    (1) Using a 10x or higher magnification, visually inspect for
skin separation along the leading edge of any exposed (bare metal)
blade skin aft of the skin-to-spar bond line on the lower surface of
each blade. If there is any skin separation, the blade is
unairworthy.
    (2) Perform a ``tap test'' to detect any separation or void on
the skin-to-spar bonded areas on the lower blade skin aft of the
skin-to-spar bond line of each blade using a 1965 or later U.S.
quarter-dollar coin. If there is any separation or any void, the
blade is unairworthy.
    (3) Remove both blade tip covers. Using a 10x or higher
magnification, visually inspect the blade tip area exposed when the
blade tip covers were removed. ``Tap test'' the skin to cap bond
joints on both upper and lower surfaces. If corrosion, separation,
or any void is detected, the blade is unairworthy.
    (4) Repaint any exposed area of the blade according to the
Compliance Procedure, paragraphs 3 through 7, of R22 Service Letter
SL-56 and R44 Service Letter SL-32, Revision A, dated March 29,
2007.
    (b) Before further flight, replace any unairworthy blade with an
airworthy blade.
    (c) Thereafter, if the rotor blade has been found airworthy by
the inspections in paragraph (a), before each flight, visually check
for any exposed (bare metal) skin-to-spar bonded area on the lower
surface of each blade within the outboard 24 inches paying
particular attention to the last 10 inches before the tip. An owner/
operator (pilot) holding at least a private pilot certificate may
perform this visual check and must enter compliance into the
aircraft maintenance records in accordance with 14 CFR 43.11 and
91.417(a)(2)(V). If a pilot finds any area of skin bare metal in the
outboard 24 inches of either blade, before further flight, a
qualified mechanic must comply with the requirements of paragraph
(a) of this AD.
    (d) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Contact the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
ATTN: (For R22) Eric Schrieber, Aviation Safety Engineer, Aircraft
Certification Office, Airframe Branch, 3960 Paramount Blvd.,
Lakewood, California 90712, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax (562) 627-
5210, or (for R44) Fred Guerin, Aviation Safety Engineer, Airframe
Branch, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712, telephone
(562) 627-5232, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for information about previously
approved alternative methods of compliance.
    (e) Repaint the exposed area of a blade by following Robinson
R22 Service Letter SL-56 and R44 Service Letter SL-32, Revision A,
dated March 29, 2007. The Director of the Federal Register approved
this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)
and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from Robinson Helicopter
Company, 2901 Airport Drive. Torrance, CA 90505, telephone (310)
539-0508, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Copies may be inspected at the FAA,
Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas or at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability
of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html
.

    (f) This amendment becomes effective on January 18, 2008.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on December 17, 2007.
David A. Downey,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E7-25395 Filed 1-2-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 116 (Thursday, June 16, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36363-36364]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12977]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0383; FMCSA-2014-0385; FMCSA-2014-0387; FMCSA-
2015-0328; FMCSA-2018-0137; FMCSA-2018-0139; FMCSA-2019-0109; FMCSA-
2019-0110]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Hearing

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department
of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 16
individuals from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle
(CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these hard of hearing and deaf
individuals to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions were applicable on November 19, 2021. The
exemptions expire on November 19, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected], FMCSA,
DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224, Washington, DC 20590-
0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., ET, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions regarding
viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Dockets
Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Comments

    To view comments go to www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket
number, FMCSA-2014-0383, FMCSA-2014-0385, FMCSA-2014-0387, FMCSA-2015-
0328, FMCSA-2018-0137, FMCSA-2018-0139, FMCSA-2019-0109, or FMCSA-2019-
0110 in the keyword box, and click ``Search.'' Next, sort the results
by ``Posted (Newer-Older),'' choose the first notice listed, and click
``Browse Comments.'' If you do not have access to the internet, you may
view the docket online by visiting Dockets Operations in Room W12-140
on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to

help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting
Dockets Operations.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(6), DOT solicits comments
from the public on the exemption request. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On November 22, 2021, FMCSA published a notice announcing its
decision to renew exemptions for 16 individuals from the hearing
standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) to operate a CMV in interstate
commerce and requested comments from the public (86 FR 66385). The
public comment period ended on December 22, 2021, and no comments were
received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of
safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved
by complying with Sec.  391.41(b)(11).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing
found in Sec.  391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person first perceives a forced
whispered voice in the better ear at not less than 5 feet with or
without the use of a hearing aid or, if tested by use of an audiometric
device, does not have an average hearing loss in the better ear greater
than 40 decibels at 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or without a
hearing aid when the audiometric device is calibrated to American
National Standard (formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5--1951.
    This standard was adopted in 1970 and was revised in 1971 to allow
drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a hearing
aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (Apr. 22, 1970) and 36 FR 12857 (July 3, 1971).

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

IV. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 16 renewal exemption applications,
FMCSA announces its decision to exempt the following drivers from the
hearing requirement in Sec.  391.41(b)(11).
    As of November 19, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315(b), the following 16 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the hearing requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (86 FR 66385):

Carlos Arellano (CA)
Jeffrey Barbuto (NH)
John Fazio (FL)
Debbie Gaskill (GA)
Derek Hawkins (NH)
Emil Iontchev (IL)
Justin Kilgore (FL)
Danny McGowan (WV)
Matthew Moore (TX)
Abdiwahab Olow (MN)
Tami Richardson-Nelson (NE)
Willis Ryan (GA)
Anthony Saive (TN)
Dustin Selby (OH)
Jennifer Valentine (TX)
Derron Washington (IL)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2014-0383, FMCSA-
2014-0385, FMCSA-2014-0387, FMCSA-2015-0328, FMCSA-2018-0137, FMCSA-
2018-0139, FMCSA-2019-0109, or FMCSA-2019-0110. Their exemptions were
applicable as of November 19, 2021 and will expire on November 19,
2023.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid
for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) the person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b).

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-12977 Filed 6-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 58 (Monday, March 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 17530]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7135]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 23c-1, SEC File No. 270-253, OMB Control No. 3235-0260.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to
submit this existing collection of information to the Office of
Management and Budget for extension and approval.
    Rule 23c-1 (17 CFR 270.23c-1) under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a), among other things, permits a closed-end fund to
repurchase its securities for cash if in addition to the other
requirements set forth in the rule: (i) Payment of the purchase price
is accompanied or preceded by a written confirmation of the purchase;
(ii) the asset coverage per unit of the security to be purchased is
disclosed to the seller or his agent; and (iii) if the security is a
stock, the fund has, within the preceding six months, informed
stockholders of its intention to purchase stock. Commission staff
estimates that approximately 29 closed-end funds rely on Rule 23c-1
annually to undertake 261 repurchases of their securities. Commission
staff estimates that, on average, a fund spends 2.5 hours to comply
with the paperwork requirements listed above each time it undertakes a
security repurchase under the rule. Commission staff thus estimates the
total annual burden of the rule's paperwork requirements is 653 hours.
    In addition, the fund must file with the Commission a copy of any
written solicitation to purchase securities given by or on behalf of
the fund to 10 or more persons. The copy must be filed as an exhibit to
Form N-CSR (17 CFR 249.331 and 274.128). The burden associated with
filing Form N-CSR is addressed in the submission related to that form.
    The estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not derived from a
comprehensive or even a representative survey or study of the costs of
Commission rules and forms.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information has practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of
the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to
comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this
publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Thomas Bayer, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312; or send an
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: March 20, 2012.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-7135 Filed 3-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P