MYC BlackRock MuniYield California Fund Inc

PROPOSAL 1—ELECTION OF BOARD NOMINEES

The purpose of Proposal 1 is to elect Board Members for each Fund.

Nominees for each Fund. The Board of each Fund consists of 11 Board Members, nine of whom are not “interested persons” of the Funds (as defined in the 1940 Act) (the “Independent Board Members”). Shareholders of each Fund will consider electing all 11 Board Nominees at the meeting. Each Board Member elected at the meeting will serve until the later of the date of the 2014 annual meeting or until his or her successor is elected and qualifies, or until his or her earlier death, resignation, retirement or removal.

With respect to the Preferred Funds, the owners of Preferred Shares are entitled to vote as a separate class to elect two of the Board Members (the “Preferred Share Nominees”) for the Preferred Fund in which they own Preferred Shares. This means that owners of common shares are not entitled to vote in connection with the election of the Preferred Share Nominees. However, the owners of common shares and the owners of Preferred Shares, voting together as a single class, are entitled to elect the remainder of the Board Nominees. Frank J. Fabozzi and W. Carl Kester are standing for election this year as the Preferred Share Nominees.

The Board recommends a vote “FOR” the election of Paul L. Audet, Michael J. Castellano, Richard E. Cavanagh, Frank J. Fabozzi, Kathleen F. Feldstein, James T. Flynn, Henry Gabbay, Jerrold B. Harris, R. Glenn Hubbard, W. Carl Kester and Karen P. Robards (the “Board Nominees”). To vote for the Board Nominees, please vote by telephone or via the Internet, as described in the proxy card, or date and sign the enclosed proxy card and return it promptly in the enclosed postage-paid envelope. Each of the Board Nominees has consented to being named in this Proxy Statement and to serve as a Board Member if elected.

Board Members’/Nominees’ Biographical Information. Please refer to the below table which identifies the Board Nominees, including any Preferred Share Nominees, for election to the Board of each Fund and sets forth certain biographical information about the Board Members and/or Board Nominees, for all of the Funds. Each Board Nominee was nominated by the Governance and Nominating Committee of the Board of each respective Fund. Richard E. Cavanagh was selected to serve as the Chair and Karen P. Robards was selected to serve as the Vice Chair of each Board. All of the closed-end registered investment companies advised by the Advisor, including the Funds, are referred to collectively as the “Closed-End Complex.”

6

Table of Contents

7

Table of Contents

8

Table of Contents

9

Table of Contents

The Independent Board Members have adopted a statement of policy that describes the experiences, qualifications, skills and attributes that are necessary and desirable for potential Independent Board Member candidates (the “Statement of Policy”). The Boards believe that each Independent Board Member satisfied, at the time he or she was initially elected or appointed a Board Member, and continues to satisfy, the standards contemplated by the Statement of Policy as well as the standards set forth in each Fund’s By-laws. Furthermore, in determining that a particular Board Member was and continues to be qualified to serve as a Board Member, the Boards have considered a variety of criteria, none of which, in isolation, was controlling. The Boards believe that, collectively, the Board Members/Nominees have balanced and diverse experiences, skills, attributes and qualifications, which allow the Boards to operate effectively in governing the Funds and protecting the interests of shareholders. Among the attributes common to all Board Members/Nominees is their ability to review critically, evaluate, question and discuss information provided to them, to interact effectively with the Funds’ investment adviser, sub-

10

Table of Contents

advisers, other service providers, counsel and independent auditors, and to exercise effective business judgment in the performance of their duties as Board Members. Each Board Member’s/Nominee’s ability to perform his or her duties effectively is evidenced by his or her educational background or professional training; business, consulting, public service or academic positions; experience from service as a board member of the Funds or the other funds in the BlackRock fund complexes (and any predecessor funds), other investment funds, public companies, or not-for-profit entities or other organizations; ongoing commitment and participation in Board and committee meetings, as well as their leadership of standing and other committees throughout the years; or other relevant life experiences.

The following table discusses some of the experiences, qualifications and skills of each of our Board Members and/or Board Nominees that support the conclusion that they should serve (or continue to serve) on the Boards.

11

Table of Contents

12

Table of Contents

13

Table of Contents

14

Table of Contents

Board Leadership Structure and Oversight

The Boards consist of eleven individuals, nine of whom are Independent Board Members. The registered investment companies advised by the Advisor are composed of the BlackRock Closed-End Complex, two complexes of open-end funds and one complex of exchange-traded funds. The Funds are included in the BlackRock Closed-End Complex. The Board Members also oversee the operations of other closed-end registered investment companies included in the BlackRock Closed-End Complex as directors or trustees.

The Boards have overall responsibility for the oversight of the Funds. The Chair of the Boards and the Chief Executive Officer are two different people. Not only is the Chair of the Boards an Independent Board Member, but also the Chair of each Board committee (each, a “Committee”) is an Independent Board Member. The Boards have six standing Committees: an Audit Committee, a Governance and Nominating Committee, a Compliance Committee, a Performance Oversight Committee, a Leverage Committee and an Executive Committee. The Funds do not have a compensation committee because their executive officers, other than the CCO, do not receive any direct compensation from the Funds and the CCO’s compensation is comprehensively reviewed by the Boards. The role of the Chair of the Boards is to preside at all meetings of the Boards and to act as a liaison with service providers, officers, attorneys, and other Board Members between meetings. The Chair of each Committee performs a similar role with respect to such Committee. The Chair of the Boards or Committees may also perform such other functions as may be delegated by the Boards or the Committees from time to time. The Independent Board Members meet regularly outside the presence of the Funds’ management, in executive session or with other

15

Table of Contents

service providers to the Funds. The Boards have regular meetings five times a year, including a meeting to consider the approval of the Funds’ investment management agreements, and may hold special meetings if necessary before their next regular meeting. Each Committee meets regularly to conduct the oversight functions delegated to that Committee by the Boards and reports its findings to the Boards. The Boards and each standing Committee conduct annual assessments of their oversight function and structure. The Boards have determined that the Boards’ leadership structure is appropriate because it allows the Boards to exercise independent judgment over management and to allocate areas of responsibility among Committees and the Boards to enhance effective oversight.

The Boards decided to separate the roles of Chair and Chief Executive Officer because they believe that an independent Chair:

The Boards have engaged the Advisor to manage the Funds on a day-to-day basis. Each Board is responsible for overseeing the Advisor, other service providers, the operations of each Fund and associated risks in accordance with the provisions of the 1940 Act, state law, other applicable laws, each Fund’s charter, and each Fund’s investment objective(s) and strategies. The Boards review, on an ongoing basis, the Funds’ performance, operations, and investment strategies and techniques. The Boards also conduct reviews of the Advisor and its role in running the operations of the Funds.

Day-to-day risk management with respect to the Funds is the responsibility of the Advisor or other service providers (depending on the nature of the risk), subject to the supervision of the Advisor. The Funds are subject to a number of risks, including investment, compliance, operational and valuation risks, among others. While there are a number of risk management functions performed by the Advisor or other service providers, as applicable, it is not possible to eliminate all of the risks applicable to the Funds. Risk oversight is part of the Boards’ general oversight of the Funds and is addressed as part of various Board and Committee activities. The Boards, directly or through Committees, also review reports from, among others, management, the independent registered public accounting firm for the Funds, the Advisor, and internal auditors for the Advisor or its affiliates, as appropriate, regarding risks faced by the Funds and management’s or the service provider’s risk functions. The Committee system facilitates the timely and efficient consideration of matters by the Board Members and facilitates effective oversight of compliance with legal and regulatory requirements and of the Funds’ activities and associated risks. The Boards have appointed a Chief Compliance Officer, who oversees the implementation and testing of the Funds’ compliance program and reports regularly to the Boards regarding compliance matters for the Funds and their service providers. The Independent Board Members have engaged independent legal counsel to assist them in performing their oversight responsibilities.

Compensation. Information relating to compensation paid to the Board Members for each Fund’s most recent fiscal year is set forth in Appendix B .

16

Table of Contents

Equity Securities Owned by Board Members and Board Nominees. Information relating to the amount of equity securities owned by Board Members/Nominees in the Funds that they are nominated to oversee, as well as certain other funds in the Closed-End Complex, as of April 30, 2013 is set forth in Appendix C .

Attendance of Board Members at Annual Shareholders’ Meetings. It is the policy of all the Funds to encourage Board Members to attend the annual shareholders’ meeting. All of the Board Members of each Fund attended last year’s annual shareholders’ meeting.

Board Meetings. During the calendar year 2012, the Board of each Fund met 7 times. Information relating to the number of times that the Boards met during each Fund’s most recent fiscal year is set forth in Appendix D . No incumbent Board Member attended less than 75% of the aggregate number of meetings of each Board and of each committee of each Board on which the Board Member served during each Fund’s most recently completed fiscal year.

Standing Committees of the Boards. Information relating to the various standing committees of the Boards is set forth in Appendix E .

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance. Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) requires the Funds’ Board Members, executive officers, persons who own more than ten percent of a registered class of a Fund’s equity securities, BlackRock Advisors and certain officers of BlackRock Advisors (including in some cases former Section 16 insiders for a period of up to 6 months), to file reports on holdings of, and transactions in, Fund shares with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and to furnish the Funds with copies of all such reports. Based solely on a review of copies of such reports furnished to the relevant Funds and representations from these reporting persons, each Fund believes that its Board Members, executive officers, ten percent holders, BlackRock Advisors and certain officers of BlackRock Advisors met all such applicable SEC filing requirements for the Funds’ most recently concluded fiscal year, except for any late filings disclosed in previous proxy statements and certain inadvertent late filings by each of the Independent Board Members in connection with their participation in the Closed-End Complex’s deferred compensation plan. For each Independent Board Member, there were two late Form 4 filings, each relating to one transaction, for BlackRock Corporate High Yield Fund VI, Inc. (HYT). Such late filings were due to administrative errors and no fault of the Independent Board Members whatsoever.

Executive Officers of the Funds. Information about the executive officers of each Fund, including their year of birth and their principal occupations during the past five years, is set forth in Appendix F .

Your Board recommends that you vote “FOR” the election of each Board Nominee to the Board of your Fund(s).

Litigation Disclosure. On August 11, 2010, the Advisor announced that a derivative complaint had been filed by Dolores Eitel and other shareholders of BlackRock MuniYield California Quality Fund, Inc. (“MCA”), BlackRock MuniYield Quality Fund III, Inc. (“MYI”), BlackRock MuniYield Fund, Inc. (“MYD”) and BlackRock MuniHoldings Investment Quality Fund (“MFL”) on August 3, 2010 in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County. The complaint named the Advisor, BlackRock, Inc. and certain of the directors/trustees, officers and portfolio managers of MCA, MYI, MYD and MFL as defendants (the “BlackRock Parties”). The complaint alleged, among other things, that the BlackRock Parties breached fiduciary duties owed to MCA, MYI, MYD and MFL and their Common Shareholders by redeeming auction-market preferred shares, auction rate preferred securities, auction preferred shares and auction rate securities (collectively, “AMPS”) at

17

Table of Contents

their liquidation preference. The complaint sought unspecified damages for losses purportedly suffered by MCA, MYI, MYD and MFL as a result of the prior redemptions and injunctive relief preventing MCA, MYI, MYD and MFL from redeeming AMPS at their liquidation preference in the future. On March 15, 2012, the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County entered an order consolidating the above-referenced derivative complaint with another derivative complaint, containing almost identical allegations, already pending in that court. The court on March 15, 2012, also granted plaintiffs permission to file an amended complaint. On April 16, 2012, the plaintiffs amended their complaint and filed a consolidated shareholder derivative complaint which contains similar substantive allegations to the original complaint as to, among others, MCA, MYI and MFL (the “Consolidated Shareholder Derivative Complaint”). However, the Consolidated Shareholder Derivative Complaint did not include MYD as a nominal defendant. Thus, MYD is no longer a nominal defendant in the derivative complaint. On July 20, 2012, the BlackRock Parties filed a motion to dismiss the complaint (the “Dismissal Motion”). On September 14, 2012, plaintiffs filed a motion to hold the Dismissal Motion in abeyance and allow plaintiffs to conduct limited discovery (the “Discovery Motion”) before responding to the Dismissal Motion. The parties subsequently agreed to proceed with limited discovery pending resolution of the defendants’ motion to dismiss. On June 10, 2013, the parties filed a stipulation dismissing the complaint without prejudice. The stipulation is subject to the approval of the court.

Settlement of Shareholder Solicitation. On June 15, 2011, 14 BlackRock closed-end registered investment companies listed on Appendix I (the “Settlement Funds”) and certain other BlackRock closed-end registered investment companies, including the Funds, entered into an agreement (the “Agreement”) with Karpus Management, Inc. (“Karpus”), Special Opportunities Fund, Inc. (“SOF”) and Opportunity Partners, L.P. (“Opportunity Partners” and, together with SOF, the “Bulldog/Brooklyn Funds”). As it pertains to the Funds, Karpus and the Bulldog/Brooklyn Funds agreed to abide by certain “standstill restrictions,” including refraining from bringing lawsuits against the Funds or engaging in any proxy contest against the Funds, through the Funds’ and Settlement Funds’ 2012 annual meetings of shareholders. The parties also agreed to a mutual non-disparagement provision through the Funds’ 2012 annual meetings of shareholders. Among other things, Karpus and the Bulldog/Brooklyn Funds also agreed to dismiss a lawsuit previously brought by them that challenged the adoption of By-law amendments by the boards of directors/trustees of certain of the Settlement Funds, which amendments are substantially similar to amendments also adopted by all of the Funds. Karpus and the Bulldog/Brooklyn Funds also agreed to withdraw their purported nominees for election as a director/trustee of the Settlement Funds at the 2011 annual meeting of shareholders and to abide by similar “standstill restrictions” with respect to the Settlement Funds until after their 2014 annual meetings of shareholders. The Boards of the Funds believe that the Agreement is in the best interests of the Funds and their shareholders.

In addition, each of the Settlement Funds agreed that, if all of the outstanding AMPS of such Settlement Fund were not redeemed or called for redemption two weeks prior to the date such Settlement Fund mails its proxy materials to shareholders in connection with the Settlement Fund’s 2012 annual meeting of shareholders (each, a “2012 Annual Meeting”), Karpus or the Bulldog/Brooklyn Funds, as applicable (based on the party who submitted the nomination notice), would be entitled to designate an individual (the “Designee”) to be nominated as a director/trustee elected by the preferred shareholders of such Settlement Fund, to serve on the board of directors/trustees of such Settlement Fund, and such Settlement Fund will include the Designee in the Settlement Fund’s proxy materials, and such Settlement Fund’s board of directors/trustees will recommend that the Designee be elected, in connection with its 2012 Annual Meeting if the Designee is reasonably acceptable to the board of directors/trustees of the Settlement Fund and agrees to resign from the board of directors/trustees at such time as all of the AMPS of the Settlement Fund are redeemed. The Settlement Funds were and are under no obligation to

18

Table of Contents

redeem any of the AMPS and no redemption of AMPS will be made unless the board of directors/trustees of the Settlement Fund determines that such redemption is in the best interests of all of its shareholders.

On May 29, 2012, two Settlement Funds, BlackRock California Municipal 2018 Term Trust (BJZ) and BlackRock Municipal 2018 Term Trust (BPK), entered into an agreement with the Bulldog/Brooklyn Funds to amend their Agreement so that the provisions described above relating to BJZ’s and BPK’s 2012 Annual Meeting were extended to BJZ’s and BPK’s 2013 annual meeting of shareholders.

As of the date of this Proxy Statement, all of the Settlement Funds, except for BJZ and BPK, have redeemed all of their previously outstanding AMPS. As of the date of this Proxy Statement, BJZ and BPK had each redeemed $12,225,000 and $51,750,000, respectively, of its outstanding AMPS since February 29, 2008, which represents approximately 22.0% and 37.6% of all AMPS outstanding for BJZ and BPK, respectively, as of February 29, 2008. As of the date of this Proxy Statement, BJZ and BPK have not received any request from Karpus or the Bulldog/Brooklyn Funds to nominate a Designee to serve on such Settlement Fund’s board of trustees.

VOTE REQUIRED AND MANNER OF VOTING PROXIES

A quorum of shareholders is required to take action at each meeting. For MFL, MFT, MPA and MYF, the holders of a majority of the shares entitled to vote on any matter at a meeting present in person or by proxy shall constitute a quorum for purposes of conducting business on such matter. For MHE, the holders of a majority of the shares entitled to vote on any matter at a meeting present in person or by proxy shall constitute a quorum for purposes of conducting business on such matter except when the owners of Preferred Shares voting as a separate class are entitled to elect any Board Member, in which case the holders of one-third of the Preferred Shares entitled to vote at a meeting shall constitute a quorum for purposes of such an election. For the remainder of the Funds, the holders of one-third of the shares entitled to vote on any matter at a meeting present in person or by proxy shall constitute a quorum for purposes of conducting business on such matter.

Except for the Funds listed in the next sentence, the affirmative vote of a plurality of the votes cast with respect to a Board Nominee at a meeting at which a quorum is present is necessary to elect each of the respective Board Nominees under Proposal 1 for each respective Fund. For MFL, MFT, MHE, MPA and MYF, the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares represented at a meeting at which a quorum is present is necessary to elect each of the respective Board Nominees under Proposal 1 for each respective Fund. For the Funds that require a plurality of votes to elect each of the Board Nominees, withheld votes and broker non-votes, if any, will not have an effect on the outcome of Proposal 1. For the Funds that require a majority of votes present to elect each of the Board Nominees, withheld votes and broker non-votes, if any, will be counted as represented at the meeting and will have the same effect as a vote against Proposal 1.

Votes cast by proxy or in person at each meeting will be tabulated by the inspectors of election appointed for that meeting. The inspectors of election will determine whether or not a quorum is present at the meeting. The inspectors of election will treat withheld votes and “broker non-votes,” if any, as present for purposes of determining a quorum. Broker non-votes occur when shares held by brokers or nominees, typically in “street name,” as to which proxies have been returned but (a) voting instructions have not been received from the beneficial owners or persons entitled to vote, (b) the broker or nominee does not have discretionary voting power or elects not to exercise

19

Table of Contents

discretion on a particular matter and (c) the shares are present at the meeting. Preferred Shares of any Fund held in “street name” may be counted for purposes of establishing a quorum of that Fund if no instructions are received one business day before the applicable meeting or, if adjourned, one business day before the day to which the meeting is adjourned.

If you hold your shares directly (not through a broker-dealer, bank or other financial institution) and if you return a signed and dated proxy card that does not specify how you wish to vote on a proposal, your shares will be voted “FOR” the Board Nominees in Proposal 1.

Broker-dealer firms holding shares of a Fund in “street name” for the benefit of their customers and clients will request the instructions of such customers and clients on how to vote their shares on Proposal 1 before the meeting. The Funds understand that, under the rules of the New York Stock Exchange and NYSE MKT, such broker-dealer firms may for certain “routine” matters, without instructions from their customers and clients, grant discretionary authority to the proxies designated by the Board to vote if no instructions have been received prior to the date specified in the broker-dealer firm’s request for voting instructions. Proposal 1 is a “routine” matter and beneficial owners who do not provide proxy instructions or who do not return a proxy card may have their shares voted by broker-dealer firms in favor of Proposal 1. A properly executed proxy card or other authorization by a beneficial owner of Fund shares that does not specify how the beneficial owner’s shares should be voted on Proposal 1 may be deemed an instruction to vote such shares in favor of the proposal.

If you hold shares of a Fund through a bank or other financial institution or intermediary (called a service agent) that has entered into a service agreement with the Fund or a distributor of the Fund, the service agent may be the record holder of your shares. At the meeting, a service agent will vote shares for which it receives instructions from its customers in accordance with those instructions. A properly executed proxy card or other authorization by a shareholder that does not specify how the shareholder’s shares should be voted on a proposal may be deemed to authorize a service provider to vote such shares in favor of the proposal. Depending on its policies, applicable law or contractual or other restrictions, a service agent may be permitted to vote shares with respect to which it has not received specific voting instructions from its customers. In those cases, the service agent may, but is not required to, vote such shares in the same proportion as those shares for which the service agent has received voting instructions. This practice is commonly referred to as “echo voting.”

If you beneficially own shares that are held in “street name” through a broker-dealer or that are held of record by a service agent, and if you do not give specific voting instructions for your shares, they may not be voted at all or, as described above, they may be voted in a manner that you may not intend. Therefore, you are strongly encouraged to give your broker-dealer or service agent specific instructions as to how you want your shares to be voted.

INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board Members, including a majority of the Independent Board Members, of each Fund have selected Deloitte & Touche LLP (“D&T”) as the independent registered public accounting firm for the Funds.

A representative of D&T is expected to be present at the meeting. The representative of D&T will have the opportunity to make a statement at the meeting if he desires to do so and is expected to be available to respond to appropriate questions.

20

Table of Contents

Each Audit Committee has discussed the matters required by the Statement on Auditing Standards No. 114, as amended (AICPA, Professional Standards, Vol. 1, AU section 380), as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”) in Rule 3200T.

Each Audit Committee has received from D&T the written disclosures and the letter required by PCAOB Ethics and Independence Rule 3526, Communication with Audit Committees Concerning Independence, and has discussed D&T’s independence with D&T, and has considered the compatibility of non-audit services with the independence of the independent registered public accounting firm.

Each Audit Committee also reviews and discusses the Fund’s financial statements with Fund management and the independent registered public accounting firm. If any material concerns arise during the course of the audit and the preparation of the audited financial statements mailed to shareholders and included in the Fund’s Annual Report to Shareholders, the Audit Committee would be notified by Fund management or the independent registered public accounting firm. The Audit Committees received no such notifications for any Fund during its most recently completed fiscal year. Following each Audit Committee’s review and discussion of the Fund’s independent registered public accounting firm, pursuant to authority delegated by its respective Board, each Audit Committee approved the respective Fund’s audited financial statements for the Fund’s most recently completed fiscal year (each Fund’s fiscal year end is set forth in Appendix G ) for inclusion in each Fund’s Annual Report to Shareholders.

Appendix G sets forth for each Fund the fees billed by that Fund’s independent registered public accounting firm for the two most recent fiscal years for all audit, non-audit, tax and all other services provided directly to the Fund. The fee information in Appendix G is presented under the following captions:

(a) Audit Fees—fees related to the audit and review of the financial statements included in annual reports and registration statements, and other services that are normally provided in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements, including out-of-pocket expenses.

(b) Audit-Related Fees—fees related to assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of financial statements, but not reported under “Audit Fees,” including accounting consultations, agreed-upon procedure reports, attestation reports, comfort letters, out-of-pocket expenses and internal control reviews not required by regulators.

(c) Tax Fees—fees associated with tax compliance, tax advice and tax planning, including services relating to the filing or amendment of federal, state or local income tax returns, regulated investment company qualification reviews, tax distribution and analysis reviews and miscellaneous tax advice.

(d) All Other Fees—fees for products and services provided to the Fund other than those reported under “Audit Fees,” “Audit-Related Fees” and “Tax Fees.”

Each Audit Committee is required to approve all audit engagement fees and terms for its Fund. Each Audit Committee also is required to consider and act upon (i) the provision by the Fund’s independent accountant of any non-audit services to the Fund, and (ii) the provision by the Fund’s independent accountant of non-audit services to BlackRock and any entity controlling, controlled by or under common control with BlackRock that provides ongoing services to the Fund (“Affiliated Service Providers”) to the extent that such approval (in the case of this clause (ii)) is required under applicable regulations of the SEC. See Appendix G to this Proxy Statement for

21

Table of Contents

information about the fees paid by the Funds, their investment advisers, and Affiliated Service Providers to each Fund’s independent registered public accounting firm.

The Audit Committee of each Fund complies with applicable laws and regulations with regard to the pre-approval of services. Audit, audit-related and tax compliance services provided to a Fund on an annual basis require specific pre-approval by the Fund’s Audit Committee. As noted above, the Audit Committee also must approve other non-audit services provided to a Fund and those non-audit services provided to a Fund’s Affiliated Service Providers that relate directly to the operations and financial reporting of a Fund. Each Audit Committee has implemented policies and procedures by which such services may be approved other than by the full Audit Committee. Subject to such policies and procedures, including applicable dollar limitations, the Audit Committee may pre-approve, without consideration on a specific case-by-case basis (“general pre-approval”), certain permissible non-audit services that the Audit Committee believes are (a) consistent with the SEC’s auditor independence rules and (b) routine and recurring services that will not impair the independence of the independent registered public accounting firm. Each service approved subject to general pre-approval is presented to each Audit Committee for ratification at the next regularly scheduled in-person board meeting.

For each Fund’s two most recently completed fiscal years, there were no services rendered by D&T to the Funds for which the general pre-approval requirement was waived.

Each Audit Committee has considered the provision of non-audit services that were rendered by D&T to the Fund’s Affiliated Service Providers that were not pre-approved (and did not require pre-approval) in connection with determining such auditor’s independence. All services provided by D&T to each Fund and each Fund’s Affiliated Service Provider that required pre-approval were pre-approved during the Fund’s most recently completed fiscal year.

The Audit Committee of each Fund consists of the following Board Members:

Karen P. Robards (Chair);

Michael J. Castellano;

Frank J. Fabozzi;

James T. Flynn; and

W. Carl Kester.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

5% Beneficial Share Ownership

As of April 30, 2013, to the best of the Funds’ knowledge, the persons listed in Appendix H beneficially owned more than 5% of the outstanding shares of the class of the Funds indicated.