80 FR 42857 - Crescent Capital Group, LP; Notice of Application

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 138 (July 20, 2015)

Page Range		42857-42859
FR Document		2015-17715

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 138 (Monday, July 20, 2015)

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 138 (Monday, July 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42857-42859]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17715]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IA-4140/803-00219]

Crescent Capital Group, LP; Notice of Application

July 14, 2015.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of application for an exemptive order under Section 206A
of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the ``Advisers Act'') and Rule
206(4)-5(e) thereunder.

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

Applicant: Crescent Capital Group, LP (``Applicant'').

Relevant Advisers Act Sections: Exemption requested under Section 206A
of the Advisers Act and Rule 206(4)-5(e) thereunder from Rule 206(4)-
5(a)(1) under the Advisers Act.

Summary of Application: Applicant requests that the Commission issue an
order under Section 206A of the Advisers Act and Rule 206(4)-5(e)
thereunder exempting Applicant from Rule 206(4)-5(a)(1) under the
Advisers Act to permit Applicant to receive compensation from a
government entity client for investment advisory services provided to
the government entity within the two-year period following a
contribution by a covered associate of Applicant to an official of the
government entity.

Filing Dates: The application was filed on October 31, 2013, and an
amended and restated application was filed on March 12, 2015.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving Applicant with a copy of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on August 10, 2015, and should be accompanied by proof of

[[Page 42858]]

service on Applicant, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Pursuant to Rule 0-5 under the Advisers 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 may request
notification of a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

Addresses: Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicant,
Crescent Capital Group, LP, c/o George Hawley, Esq., 1100 Santa Monica
Boulevard, Suite 2000, Los Angeles, CA 90025.

For Further Information Contact: Kyle R. Ahlgren, Senior Counsel, or
Holly L. Hunter-Ceci, Branch Chief, at (202) 551-6825 (Division of
Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

Supplementary Information: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site either at http://www.sec.gov/rules/iareleases.shtml or 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 (202) 551-8090.

Applicant's Representations

1. Applicant is registered with the Commission as an investment
adviser under the Advisers Act. Applicant provides investment advisory
services to two private equity funds formed in 2006 and 2008, TCW/
Crescent Mezzanine Partners IV, L.P. (``Fund IV'') and TCW/Crescent
Mezzanine Partners V, L.P. (``Fund V'', and together with Fund IV, the
``Funds''), as well as additional funds. The Funds are ``covered
investment pools'' as defined in Rule 206(4)-5(f)(3)(ii) under the
Advisers Act that make long-term investments in private companies and
other illiquid assets.
2. Mr. Jean Marc Chapus (the ``Contributor'') is a managing partner
of Applicant. The Contributor is, and was at all relevant times, a
``covered associate'' of Applicant as that term is defined in Rule
206(4)-5(f)(2). The Contributor frequently has been solicited for, and
has made, political contributions in the past.
3. The Los Angeles City Employees' Retirement System (the ``Plan'')
falls within the definition of a ``government entity'' as that term is
defined in Rule 206(4)-5(f)(5)(iii). The Plan invested in the Funds in
2006 and 2008, (for Fund IV and Fund V, respectively) and each Fund has
been closed to new investors since that time. Under the terms of the
governing documents of the Funds, investors, including the Plan, are
not permitted to withdraw their investments, except under extraordinary
circumstances that are beyond the control of either Applicant or the
Plan, for a period of ten years following the date of the investment
(2016 or 2018 for Fund IV and Fund V, respectively). Applicant's fees
were established at the inception of the Funds and are not subject to
renegotiation during the term of the investment.
4. In June 2011, an individual known to the Contributor, but
unrelated to Applicant, contacted him directly and requested a
contribution to the campaign of Mr. Austin Beutner (the ``Recipient''),
a candidate for the office of Mayor of Los Angeles (the ``Office'').
The Office is entitled to appoint members of the Plan's Board of
Administration who can influence the selection of investment advisers
for the Plan and other related public pension plans. On June 10, 2011,
the Contributor made a contribution of $1,000 (the ``Contribution'') to
the Austin Beutner for Los Angeles Mayor 2013 Exploratory Committee
(the ``Committee''). At the time of the Contribution, each of the
Committee and the Recipient was an ``official'' for purposes of Rule
206(4)-5(f)(6). The Recipient withdrew from the campaign prior to the
election.
5. At the time of the Contribution, there was no discussion of the
Office's appointment powers, influence or responsibilities involving
any investment of public pension funds. Neither Applicant nor the
Contributor sought to interfere with the Plan's merit-based selection
process for advisory services, nor did they seek to negotiate higher
fees or greater ancillary benefits than would be achieved in an arm's
length transactions, nor could they have, as the selections pre-dated
the Contribution. Applicant had an existing relationship with the Plan
at the time of the Contribution, but did not engage in any new sales
efforts involving limited partnership interests in the Funds, including
any efforts designed to retain the investments in the Funds or to
renegotiate its fees.
6. Applicant first became aware of the Contribution one month
following the date it was made when, in July 2011, as a result of a
quarterly survey of political contributions conducted by Applicant's
compliance department pursuant to Applicant's contribution policies and
procedures, the Contribution was self-reported by the Contributor. Upon
learning of the Contribution, Applicant's chief compliance officer,
with the cooperation of the Contributor, promptly contacted the
Committee, which returned the Contribution shortly thereafter. At the
same time, Applicant created an escrow account to custody advisory fees
for the Funds that were attributable to the Plan. The fees that
Applicant otherwise would have earned during the two-year period
following the Contribution (the ``Time Out Period'') remain in the
escrow account.
7. At the time of the Contribution, Applicant had developed written
policies and procedures to assure compliance with Rule 206(4)-5. The
policies and procedures included a requirement for pre-clearance of all
political contributions and provided for quarterly surveys of all
covered associates. Such policies and procedures were designed, among
other things, to assure that any unreported political contributions
were detected by Applicant's compliance department in a timely fashion.
8. At the time of the Contribution, communication from the
Committee, as well as the Committee's Web site and other published
information, referred consistently to its ``exploratory'' nature.\1\
While the Contributor had received compliance training, he did not
consider whether Rule 206(4)-5 and Applicant's pre-clearance
requirement would have applied to contributions made to exploratory
committees. The Contributor therefore did not pre-clear the
Contribution with Applicant as required under its policies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ The Committee had in fact filed as a campaign committee with
the local election commission. Under Rule 206(4)-5(f)(6), the term
``official'' includes election committees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. Subsequent to the Contribution, Applicant has enhanced its
training program by stressing the importance of its pre-clearance
requirement and has highlighted the fact that contributions to
exploratory and other political committees are subject to its pre-
clearance requirement, among other things.

Applicant's Legal Analysis

1. Rule 206(4)-5(a)(1) under the Advisers Act prohibits a
registered investment adviser from providing investment advisory
services for compensation to a government entity within two years after
a contribution to an official of the government entity is made by the
investment adviser or any covered associate of the investment adviser.
The Plan is a ``government entity,'' as defined in Rule 206(4)-5(f)(5),
the Contributor is a ``covered associate'' as defined in Rule 206(4)-
5(f)(2), and each of the Committee and the Recipient is an ``official''
as defined

[[Page 42859]]

in Rule 206(4)-5(f)(6). Rule 206(4)-5(c) provides that when a
government entity invests in a covered investment pool, the investment
adviser to that covered investment pool is treated as providing
advisory services directly to the government entity. The Funds are
``covered investment'' pools as defined in Rule 206(4)-5(f)(3)(ii).
2. Section 206A of the Advisers Act grants the Commission the
authority to ``conditionally or unconditionally exempt any person or
transaction . . . from any provision or provisions of [the Advisers
Act] or of any rule or regulation thereunder, if and to the extent that
such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and
consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly
intended by the policy and provisions of [the Advisers Act].''
3. Rule 206(4)-5(e) provides that the Commission may exempt an
investment adviser from the prohibition under Rule 206(4)-5(a)(1) upon
consideration of the factors listed below, among others:
(1) Whether the exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public
interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the
purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Advisers
Act;
(2) Whether the investment adviser: (i) Before the contribution
resulting in the prohibition was made, adopted and implemented policies
and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violations of the rule;
and (ii) prior to or at the time the contribution which resulted in
such prohibition was made, had no actual knowledge of the contribution;
and (iii) after learning of the contribution: (A) Has taken all
available steps to cause the contributor involved in making the
contribution which resulted in such prohibition to obtain a return of
the contribution; and (B) has taken such other remedial or preventive
measures as may be appropriate under the circumstances;
(3) Whether, at the time of the contribution, the contributor was a
covered associate or otherwise an employee of the investment adviser,
or was seeking such employment;
(4) The timing and amount of the contribution which resulted in the
prohibition;
(5) The nature of the election (e.g., federal, state or local); and
(6) The contributor's apparent intent or motive in making the
contribution which resulted in the prohibition, as evidenced by the
facts and circumstances surrounding such contribution.
4. Applicant requests an order pursuant to Section 206A and Rule
206(4)-5(e), exempting it from the two-year prohibition on compensation
imposed by Rule 206(4)-5(a)(1) with respect to investment advisory
services provided to the Funds within the two-year period following the
Contribution.
5. Applicant submits that the exemption is necessary and
appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection
of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and
provisions of the Act. Applicant further submits that the other factors
set forth in Rule 206(4)-5 similarly weigh in favor of granting an
exemption to Applicant to avoid consequences disproportionate to the
violation.
6. Applicant states that the Plan first determined to invest in the
Funds before the Contribution was made, and established and maintained
its relationships with Applicant on an arm's length basis free from any
improper influence as a result of the Contribution. Applicant notes
that: (i) The Plan's most recent investment decision was made in 2008,
prior to the Contribution, at the time of its last investment
commitment in Fund V; and (ii) due to the committed nature of the
Plan's investment in the Funds, the Plan had no investment decision to
consider at the time of the Contribution.
7. Applicant states that it had developed policies and procedures
to assure compliance with Rule 206(4)-5, which included a requirement
for pre-clearance of all political contributions and provided for
quarterly surveys of all covered associates, and that such quarterly
survey prompted the Contributor to report the Contribution. Applicant
further states that training was provided to Applicant's employees,
including the Contributor, that addressed Rule 206(4)-5 and Applicant's
policies and procedures.
8. Applicant states that at no time did any employees of Applicant,
other than the Contributor, have any knowledge that the Contribution
had been made prior to its disclosure by the Contributor in July 2011.
9. Applicant states that once the Contribution was discovered,
Applicant began to gather additional facts about the Contribution and
the Committee, and fees attributable to the Plan's investment in the
Funds were placed in escrow. Applicant further states that after
learning of the Contribution, Applicant took steps to limit the
Contributor's contact with any representative of the Plan or related
plans for the duration of the Time Out Period, and that the Contributor
had no contact with any representative of the Plan or related plans
during the Time Out Period.
10. Applicant states that the Contribution was made solely for the
purpose of participating in the local election process, and was not
intended to improperly influence any decision by the Plan. Applicant
notes that the Contributor resides in the community in which the
Recipient was running for office and that the Contributor was entitled
to vote in the election. Applicant further states that the Contributor
has a history of making political contributions to candidates for
elected office.
11. Applicant states that Applicant had an existing relationship
with the Plan at the time of the Contribution, but did not engage in
any new sales efforts involving limited partnership interests in the
Funds, including any efforts designed to retain the investments in the
Funds or to renegotiate its fees.
12. Applicant contends that imposing a limitation on the receipt of
advisory compensation associated with the Plan's investment in the
Funds would result in a disproportionate consequence to Applicant that
is not necessary to achieve the intended purposes of Rule 206(4)-5.
Applicant states that neither Applicant nor the Contributor sought to
interfere with the Plan's merit-based selection process for advisory
services, nor did they seek to negotiate higher fees or greater
ancillary benefits than would be achieved in an arm's length
transactions, nor could they have, as the selections pre-dated the
Contribution. Applicant further states that there was no violation of
Applicant's fiduciary duty to deal fairly or disclose material
conflicts of interest given the absence of any intent or action by
Applicant or the Contributor to influence the selection process.

For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-17715 Filed 7-17-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 138 / Monday, July 20, 2015 / Notices 42857

whether between the Exchange and its Commission summarily may available publicly. All submissions
competitors, or among market temporarily suspend such rule change if should refer to File Number SR–MIAX–
participants. Instead, the proposed rule it appears to the Commission that such 2015–46, and should be submitted on or
change is designed to allow the SPY action is necessary or appropriate in the before August 10, 2015.
Pilot Program to continue as the public interest, for the protection of For the Commission, by the Division of
Exchange believes other competing investors, or otherwise in furtherance of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
options exchanges will also extend the the purposes of the Act. If the authority.9
SPY Pilot Program for another year. Commission takes such action, the Robert W. Errett,
Commission shall institute proceedings Deputy Secretary.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s to determine whether the proposed rule
Statement on Comments on the should be approved or disapproved.
[FR Doc. 2015–17659 Filed 7–17–15; 8:45 am]
Proposed Rule Change Received From BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
Members, Participants, or Others IV. Solicitation of Comments
Written comments were neither Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
solicited nor received.
arguments concerning the foregoing, COMMISSION
III. Date of Effectiveness of the including whether the proposed rule [Release No. IA–4140/803–00219]
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for change is consistent with the Act.
Commission Action Comments may be submitted by any of Crescent Capital Group, LP; Notice of
Because the foregoing proposed rule the following methods: Application
change does not: (i) Significantly affect Electronic Comments July 14, 2015.
the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant • Use the Commission’s Internet AGENCY: Securities and Exchange
burden on competition; and (iii) become comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Commission (‘‘Commission’’).
operative for 30 days from the date on rules/sro.shtml); or ACTION: Notice of application for an
which it was filed, or such shorter time • Send an email to rule-comments@ exemptive order under Section 206A of
as the Commission may designate, it has sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– the Investment Advisers Act of 1940
become effective pursuant to Section MIAX–2015–46 on the subject line. (the ‘‘Advisers Act’’) and Rule 206(4)–
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b– Paper Comments 5(e) thereunder.
4(f)(6) thereunder.5
• Send paper comments in triplicate APPLICANT: Crescent Capital Group, LP
A proposed rule change filed
to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities (‘‘Applicant’’).
pursuant to Rule 19b–4(f)(6) under the
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
Act 6 normally does not become RELEVANT ADVISERS ACT SECTIONS:
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090.
operative for 30 days after the date of its Exemption requested under Section
filing. However, Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) 7 All submissions should refer to File 206A of the Advisers Act and Rule
permits the Commission to designate a Number SR–MIAX–2015–46. This file
206(4)–5(e) thereunder from Rule
shorter time if such action is consistent number should be included on the
206(4)–5(a)(1) under the Advisers Act.
with the protection of investors and the subject line if email is used. To help the
Commission process and review your SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicant
public interest. The Exchange has asked requests that the Commission issue an
the Commission to waive the 30-day comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will order under Section 206A of the
operative delay. The Exchange believes Advisers Act and Rule 206(4)–5(e)
that waiver of the operative delay is post all comments on the Commission’s
Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ thereunder exempting Applicant from
consistent with the protection of Rule 206(4)–5(a)(1) under the Advisers
investors and the public interest rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent Act to permit Applicant to receive
because it will allow the SPY Pilot compensation from a government entity
Program to continue without amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule client for investment advisory services
interruption. The Commission believes provided to the government entity
that waiving the 30-day operative delay change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written within the two-year period following a
is consistent with the protection of contribution by a covered associate of
investors and the public interest. communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the Applicant to an official of the
Therefore, the Commission hereby government entity.
waives the operative delay and Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the FILING DATES: The application was filed
designates the proposed rule change on October 31, 2013, and an amended
operative upon filing.8 public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be and restated application was filed on
At any time within 60 days of the
available for Web site viewing and March 12, 2015.
filing of the proposed rule change, the
printing in the Commission’s Public HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An
5 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). As required under Rule Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., order granting the application will be
19b–4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Washington, DC 20549 on official issued unless the Commission orders a
Commission with written notice of its intent to file business days between the hours of hearing. Interested persons may request
the proposed rule change, along with a brief 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such
description and the text of the proposed rule
a hearing by writing to the
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

change, at least five business days prior to the date filing also will be available for Commission’s Secretary and serving
of filing of the proposed rule change, or such inspection and copying at the principal Applicant with a copy of the request,
shorter time as designated by the Commission. office of the Exchange. All comments personally or by mail. Hearing requests
6 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
received will be posted without change; should be received by the Commission
7 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii).
8 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day
the Commission does not edit personal by 5:30 p.m. on August 10, 2015, and
operative delay, the Commission has considered the
identifying information from should be accompanied by proof of
proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, submissions. You should submit only
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). information that you wish to make 9 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:30 Jul 17, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM 20JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 138 / Monday, July 20, 2015 / Notices 42859

in Rule 206(4)–5(f)(6). Rule 206(4)–5(c) 206(4)–5(e), exempting it from the two- 10. Applicant states that the
provides that when a government entity year prohibition on compensation Contribution was made solely for the
invests in a covered investment pool, imposed by Rule 206(4)–5(a)(1) with purpose of participating in the local
the investment adviser to that covered respect to investment advisory services election process, and was not intended
investment pool is treated as providing provided to the Funds within the two- to improperly influence any decision by
advisory services directly to the year period following the Contribution. the Plan. Applicant notes that the
government entity. The Funds are 5. Applicant submits that the Contributor resides in the community in
‘‘covered investment’’ pools as defined exemption is necessary and appropriate which the Recipient was running for
in Rule 206(4)–5(f)(3)(ii). in the public interest and consistent
office and that the Contributor was
2. Section 206A of the Advisers Act with the protection of investors and the
entitled to vote in the election.
grants the Commission the authority to purposes fairly intended by the policy
‘‘conditionally or unconditionally and provisions of the Act. Applicant Applicant further states that the
exempt any person or transaction . . . further submits that the other factors set Contributor has a history of making
from any provision or provisions of [the forth in Rule 206(4)–5 similarly weigh political contributions to candidates for
Advisers Act] or of any rule or in favor of granting an exemption to elected office.
regulation thereunder, if and to the Applicant to avoid consequences 11. Applicant states that Applicant
extent that such exemption is necessary disproportionate to the violation. had an existing relationship with the
or appropriate in the public interest and 6. Applicant states that the Plan first Plan at the time of the Contribution, but
consistent with the protection of determined to invest in the Funds did not engage in any new sales efforts
investors and the purposes fairly before the Contribution was made, and involving limited partnership interests
intended by the policy and provisions of established and maintained its in the Funds, including any efforts
[the Advisers Act].’’ relationships with Applicant on an designed to retain the investments in
3. Rule 206(4)–5(e) provides that the arm’s length basis free from any
the Funds or to renegotiate its fees.
Commission may exempt an investment improper influence as a result of the
adviser from the prohibition under Rule Contribution. Applicant notes that: (i) 12. Applicant contends that imposing
206(4)–5(a)(1) upon consideration of the The Plan’s most recent investment a limitation on the receipt of advisory
factors listed below, among others: decision was made in 2008, prior to the compensation associated with the Plan’s
(1) Whether the exemption is Contribution, at the time of its last investment in the Funds would result in
necessary or appropriate in the public investment commitment in Fund V; and a disproportionate consequence to
interest and consistent with the (ii) due to the committed nature of the Applicant that is not necessary to
protection of investors and the purposes Plan’s investment in the Funds, the Plan achieve the intended purposes of Rule
fairly intended by the policy and had no investment decision to consider 206(4)–5. Applicant states that neither
provisions of the Advisers Act; at the time of the Contribution. Applicant nor the Contributor sought to
(2) Whether the investment adviser: 7. Applicant states that it had interfere with the Plan’s merit-based
(i) Before the contribution resulting in developed policies and procedures to selection process for advisory services,
the prohibition was made, adopted and assure compliance with Rule 206(4)–5, nor did they seek to negotiate higher
implemented policies and procedures which included a requirement for pre-
fees or greater ancillary benefits than
reasonably designed to prevent clearance of all political contributions
and provided for quarterly surveys of all would be achieved in an arm’s length
violations of the rule; and (ii) prior to or transactions, nor could they have, as the
at the time the contribution which covered associates, and that such
quarterly survey prompted the selections pre-dated the Contribution.
resulted in such prohibition was made,
Contributor to report the Contribution. Applicant further states that there was
had no actual knowledge of the
Applicant further states that training no violation of Applicant’s fiduciary
contribution; and (iii) after learning of
the contribution: (A) Has taken all was provided to Applicant’s employees, duty to deal fairly or disclose material
available steps to cause the contributor including the Contributor, that conflicts of interest given the absence of
involved in making the contribution addressed Rule 206(4)–5 and any intent or action by Applicant or the
which resulted in such prohibition to Applicant’s policies and procedures. Contributor to influence the selection
obtain a return of the contribution; and 8. Applicant states that at no time did process.
(B) has taken such other remedial or any employees of Applicant, other than For the Commission, by the Division of
preventive measures as may be the Contributor, have any knowledge Investment Management, under delegated
appropriate under the circumstances; that the Contribution had been made authority.
(3) Whether, at the time of the prior to its disclosure by the Contributor
Robert W. Errett,
contribution, the contributor was a in July 2011.
9. Applicant states that once the Deputy Secretary.
covered associate or otherwise an
employee of the investment adviser, or Contribution was discovered, Applicant [FR Doc. 2015–17715 Filed 7–17–15; 8:45 am]
was seeking such employment; began to gather additional facts about BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
(4) The timing and amount of the the Contribution and the Committee,
contribution which resulted in the and fees attributable to the Plan’s
prohibition; investment in the Funds were placed in
(5) The nature of the election (e.g., escrow. Applicant further states that
federal, state or local); and after learning of the Contribution,
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

(6) The contributor’s apparent intent Applicant took steps to limit the
or motive in making the contribution Contributor’s contact with any
which resulted in the prohibition, as representative of the Plan or related
evidenced by the facts and plans for the duration of the Time Out
circumstances surrounding such Period, and that the Contributor had no
contribution. contact with any representative of the
4. Applicant requests an order Plan or related plans during the Time
pursuant to Section 206A and Rule Out Period.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:30 Jul 17, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM 20JYN1

Document Created: 2015-12-15 12:57:55
Document Modified: 2015-12-15 12:57:55

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Action		Notice of application for an exemptive order under Section 206A of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the ``Advisers Act'') and Rule 206(4)-5(e) thereunder.
Dates		The application was filed on October 31, 2013, and an amended and restated application was filed on March 12, 2015.
Contact		Kyle R. Ahlgren, Senior Counsel, or Holly L. Hunter-Ceci, Branch Chief, at (202) 551-6825 (Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).
FR Citation		80 FR 42857