Fees for Reviews of the Rule Enforcement Programs of Designated Contract Markets and Registered Futures Associations, 26672-26674 [2012-10898]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
26672
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Clarksville, VA, Lake Country Regional,
RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Orig
Leesburg, VA, Leesburg Executive, ILS OR
LOC RWY 17, Amdt 1
Leesburg, VA, Leesburg Executive, RNAV
(GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 3
New Market, VA, New Market, Takeoff
Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Norfolk, VA, Norfolk Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
5, Amdt 26A
Newport, VT, Newport State, GPS RWY 36,
Orig-A, CANCELLED
Newport, VT, Newport State, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 36, Orig
Guernsey, WY, Camp Guernsey, GPS RWY
32, Orig, CANCELLED
Guernsey, WY, Camp Guernsey, NDB RWY
32, Amdt 1
Guernsey, WY, Camp Guernsey, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 32, Orig
Torrington, WY, Torrington Muni, NDB RWY
10, Amdt 2
Torrington, WY, Torrington Muni, NDB RWY
28, Amdt 2
RESCINDED: On March 28, 2012 (77 FR
18683), the FAA published an Amendment
in Docket No. 30833, Amdt No. 3470 to Part
97 of the Federal Aviation Regulations under
section 97.33. The following 46 entries for
Denver, CO, and 1 entry for Camden, AR,
effective 31 May, 2012, are hereby rescinded
in their entirety:
Camden, AR, Harrell Field, VOR/DME RWY
1, Amdt 10
Denver, CO, Centennial, Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle DP, Amdt 5
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
7, Amdt 3
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
8, Amdt 5
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
16L, Amdt 3
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
16R, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
17L, Amdt 4
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
17R, Amdt 3
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
25, Amdt 3
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
26, Amdt 3
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
34L, ILS RWY 34L (CAT II), ILS RWY 34L
(CAT III), ILS RWY 34L (SA CAT I), Amdt
2
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
34R, ILS RWY 34R (CAT II), ILS RWY 34R
(CAT III), ILS RWY 34R (SA CAT I), Amdt
3
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
35L, ILS RWY 35L (CAT II), ILS RWY 35L
(CAT III), ILS RWY 35L (SA CAT I), Amdt
5
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
35R, ILS RWY 35R (CAT II), ILS RWY 35R
(CAT III), ILS RWY 35R (SA CAT I), Amdt
3
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 7, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 8, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 16L, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 16R, Amdt 1
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:50 May 04, 2012
Jkt 226001
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 17L, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 17R, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 25, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 26, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 34L, Amdt 2
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 34R, Amdt 2
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 35L, Amdt 2
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y
RWY 35R, Amdt 2
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 7, Orig
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 8, Orig
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 16L, Orig
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 16R, Orig
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 17L, Orig
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 17R, Orig
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 25, Orig
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 26, Orig
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 34L, Orig
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 34R, Orig
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 35L, Orig
Denver, CO, Denver Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 35R, Orig
Denver, CO, Front Range, ILS OR LOC RWY
17, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Front Range, ILS OR LOC RWY
26, Amdt 5
Denver, CO, Front Range, ILS OR LOC RWY
35, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Front Range, NDB RWY 26,
Amdt 5
Denver, CO, Front Range, RNAV (GPS) RWY
17, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Front Range, RNAV (GPS) RWY
26, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Front Range, RNAV (GPS) RWY
35, Amdt 1
Denver, CO, Front Range, Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3
Denver, CO, Rocky Mountain Metropolitan,
Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt
5
[FR Doc. 2012–10727 Filed 5–4–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION
17 CFR Part 1
Fees for Reviews of the Rule
Enforcement Programs of Designated
Contract Markets and Registered
Futures Associations
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ACTION:
Notice of FY 2011 schedule of
fees.
The Commission charges fees
to designated contract markets and
registered futures associations to recover
the costs incurred by the Commission in
the operation of its program of oversight
of self-regulatory organization rule
enforcement programs, specifically
National Futures Association, a
registered futures association, and the
designated contract markets. The
calculation of the fee amounts charged
for FY 2011 by this notice is based upon
an average of actual program costs
incurred during FY 2008, 2009, and
2010.
SUMMARY:
Effective Date: Each SRO is
required to remit electronically the fee
applicable to it on or before July 6, 2012.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Carney, Chief Financial Officer,
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, (202) 418–5477, Three
Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20581. For information
on electronic payment, contact Jennifer
Fleming, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155
21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581,
(202) 418–5034.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background Information
A. General
This notice relates to fees for the
Commission’s review of the rule
enforcement programs at the registered
futures associations 1 and designated
contract markets (DCM) each of which
is a self-regulatory organization (SRO)
regulated by the Commission. The
Commission recalculates the fees
charged each year to cover the costs of
operating this Commission program.2
All costs are accounted for by the
Commission’s Budget Program Activity
Codes (BPAC) system, formerly the
Management Accounting Structure
Codes (MASC) system, which records
each employee’s time for each pay
period. The fees are set each year based
on direct program costs, plus an
overhead factor. The Commission
calculates actual costs, then calculates
an alternate fee taking volume into
account, then charges the lower of the
two.3
1 NFA
is the only registered futures association.
section 237 of the Futures Trading Act of
1982, 7 U.S.C. 16a, and 31 U.S.C. 9701. For a
broader discussion of the history of Commission
fees, see 52 FR 46070, Dec. 4, 1987.
3 58 FR 42643, Aug. 11, 1993 and 17 CFR part 1,
app. B.
2 See
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
calculates the fee to recover the costs of
its rule enforcement reviews and
examinations, based on the three-year
average of the actual cost of performing
such reviews and examinations at each
SRO. The cost of operation of the
Commission’s SRO oversight program
varies from SRO to SRO, according to
the size and complexity of each SRO’s
program. The three-year averaging
computation method is intended to
smooth out year-to-year variations in
cost. Timing of the Commission’s
reviews and examinations may affect
costs—a review or examination may
span two fiscal years and reviews and
examinations are not conducted at each
SRO each year.
As noted above, adjustments to actual
costs may be made to relieve the burden
on an SRO with a disproportionately
large share of program costs. The
Commission’s formula provides for a
reduction in the assessed fee if an SRO
has a smaller percentage of United
States industry contract volume than its
percentage of overall Commission
oversight program costs. This
adjustment reduces the costs so that, as
a percentage of total Commission SRO
B. Overhead Rate
The fees charged by the Commission
to the SROs are designed to recover
program costs, including direct labor
costs and overhead. The overhead rate
is calculated by dividing total
Commission-wide overhead direct
program labor costs into the total
amount of the Commission-wide
overhead pool. For this purpose, direct
program labor costs are the salary costs
of personnel working in all Commission
programs. Overhead costs consist
generally of the following Commissionwide costs: indirect personnel costs
(leave and benefits), rent,
communications, contract services,
utilities, equipment, and supplies. This
formula has resulted in the following
overhead rates for the most recent three
years (rounded to the nearest whole
percent): 144 percent for fiscal year
2008, 147 percent for fiscal year 2009,
and 153 percent for fiscal year 2010.
C. Conduct of SRO Rule Enforcement
Reviews
Under the formula adopted by the
Commission in 1993, the Commission
Actual total costs
26673
oversight program costs, they are in line
with the pro rata percentage for that
SRO of United States industry-wide
contract volume.
The calculation is made as follows:
The fee required to be paid to the
Commission by each DCM is equal to
the lesser of actual costs based on the
three-year historical average of costs for
that DCM or one-half of average costs
incurred by the Commission for each
DCM for the most recent three years,
plus a pro rata share (based on average
trading volume for the most recent three
years) of the aggregate of average annual
costs of all DCMs for the most recent
three years. The formula for calculating
the second factor is: 0.5a + 0.5 vt =
current fee. In this formula, ‘‘a’’ equals
the average annual costs, ‘‘v’’ equals the
percentage of total volume across DCMs
over the last three years, and ‘‘t’’ equals
the average annual costs for all DCMs.
NFA has no contracts traded; hence, its
fee is based simply on costs for the most
recent three fiscal years. This table
summarizes the data used in the
calculations of the resulting fee for each
entity:
3-Year
average
actual costs
3-Year % of
volume
Volume
adjusted
costs
FY2011
Assessed
fee
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
CBOE Futures ..........................................
Chicago Board of Trade ..........................
Chicago Climate Exchange .....................
Chicago Mercantile Exchange .................
ICE Future U.S. .......................................
Kansas City Board of Trade ....................
Minneapolis Grain Exchange ...................
New York Mercantile Exchange ..............
North American Derivative Exchanges ....
One Chicago ............................................
....................
$30,305
23,590
13,511
126,362
78,321
187,679
497,654
25,175
3,471
$519
142,446
2,129
341,186
286,289
2,888
123,566
15,948
....................
....................
....................
$87,953
....................
882,542
94,043
227,296
....................
596,767
....................
....................
$173
86,901
8,573
412,413
168,898
102,835
103,748
370,123
8,392
1,157
0.057
27,706
0.025
54.224
2.883
0.139
0.047
14.214
0.000
0.134
$448
218,442
4,444
548,690
102,659
52,294
52,172
274,838
4,196
1,425
$173
86,901
4,444
412,413
102,659
52,294
52,172
274,838
4,196
1,157
Subtotal .............................................
986,069
914,972
1,888,601
1,263,214
100
1,259,607
991,247
National Futures Association ...................
1,054,392
109,639
1,206,393
790,141
....................
....................
790,141
Total ..................................................
2,040,460
1,024,611
3,094,994
2,053,355
....................
....................
1,781,388
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
An example of how the fee is
calculated for one exchange, the
Chicago Board of Trade, is set forth
here:
a. Actual three-year average costs equal
$86,901.
b. The alternative computation is: (.5)
($86,901) + (.5) (.2771) ($1,263,214) =
$218,442.
c. The fee is the lesser of a or b; in this case
$86,901.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:50 May 04, 2012
Jkt 226001
As noted above, the alternative
calculation based on contracts traded is
not applicable to NFA because it is not
a DCM and has no contracts traded. The
Commission’s average annual cost for
conducting oversight review of the NFA
rule enforcement program during fiscal
years 2008 through 2010 was $790,141
(one-third of $2,370,423). The fee to be
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
paid by the NFA for the current fiscal
year is $790,141.
II. Schedule of Fees
Therefore, fees for the Commission’s
review of the rule enforcement programs
at the registered futures associations and
DCMs regulated by the Commission are
as follows:
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
26674
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
2011 Fee
lesser of actual or calculated fee
CBOE Futures ..........................
Chicago Board of Trade ...........
Chicago Climate Exchange ......
Chicago Mercantile Exchange ..
ICE Futures U.S. ......................
Kansas City Board of Trade .....
Minneapolis Grain Exchange ...
New York Mercantile Exchange
North American Derivatives Exchange ..................................
OneChicago ..............................
$173
86,901
4,444
412,413
102,659
52,294
52,172
274,838
Subtotal .............................
Issued in Washington, DC, on this 1st day
of May, 2012, by the Commission.
David Stawick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012–10898 Filed 5–4–12; 8:45 am]
991,247
National Futures Association ....
Total ...................................
III. Payment Method
4,196
1,157
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Part 35
[Docket No. RM11–17–000; Order No. 760]
Enhancement of Electricity Market
Surveillance and Analysis Through
790,141
Ongoing Electronic Delivery of Data
From Regional Transmission
1,781,388
Organizations and Independent
System Operators
The Debt Collection Improvement Act
(DCIA) requires deposits of fees owed to
the government by electronic transfer of
funds (See 31 U.S.C. 3720). For
information about electronic payments,
please contact Jennifer Fleming at (202)
418–5034 or jfleming@cftc.gov, or see
the CFTC Web site at www.cftc.gov,
specifically, www.cftc.gov/cftc/
cftcelectronicpayments.htm.
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, DOE.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
In this final rule, the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) is amending its
regulations to require each regional
transmission organization (RTO) and
independent system operator (ISO) to
electronically deliver to the
Commission, on an ongoing basis, data
related to the markets that it
SUMMARY:
administers. Specifically, the
Commission is amending its regulations
to establish ongoing electronic delivery
of data relating to physical and virtual
offers and bids, market awards, resource
outputs, marginal cost estimates, shift
factors, financial transmission rights,
internal bilateral contracts, uplift, and
interchange pricing. Such data will
facilitate the Commission’s
development and evaluation of its
policies and regulations and will
enhance Commission efforts to detect
anti-competitive or manipulative
behavior, or ineffective market rules,
thereby helping to ensure just and
reasonable rates.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule will
become effective July 6, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William Sauer (Technical Information),
Office of Enforcement, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,
(202) 502–6639,
william.sauer@ferc.gov.
Christopher Daignault (Legal
Information), Office of the General
Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–
8286, christopher.daignault@ferc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
Paragraph
Nos.
I. Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................................................................
II. Background ...........................................................................................................................................................................................
III. Discussion ...........................................................................................................................................................................................
A. Commission Authority and the Need for Market Data .......................................................................................................
B. Duplicative Requirements .....................................................................................................................................................
C. Confidentiality of Data ..........................................................................................................................................................
D. Data Formatting .....................................................................................................................................................................
E. Web-Based Delivery ...............................................................................................................................................................
F. Data Requested .......................................................................................................................................................................
G. Implementation Timeline and Phasing ................................................................................................................................
H. Ongoing Electronic Delivery .................................................................................................................................................
I. Future Specifications and Modifications of the Data and the Process for Delivery ..........................................................
J. Technical Conference .............................................................................................................................................................
IV. Information Collection Statement ......................................................................................................................................................
V. Environmental Analysis ......................................................................................................................................................................
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act ..................................................................................................................................................................
VII. Document Availability ......................................................................................................................................................................
VIII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification ...............................................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
139 FERC ¶ 61,053
Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff,
Chairman; Philip D. Moeller, John R.
Norris, and Cheryl A. LaFleur.
Final Rule
Issued April 19, 2012
I. Introduction
(Commission) is revising its regulations
to require each regional transmission
organization (RTO) and independent
system operator (ISO) to electronically
deliver to the Commission, on an
ongoing basis, data related to the
markets that it administers. The
Commission, acting pursuant to sections
301(b) and 307(a) of the Federal Power
1. In this final rule, the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:50 May 04, 2012
Jkt 226001
Act (FPA),1 will amend its regulations
to establish ongoing electronic delivery
of data relating to physical and virtual
offers and bids, market awards, resource
outputs, marginal cost estimates, shift
factors, financial transmission rights
(FTR), internal bilateral contracts, uplift,
and interchange pricing. Such data will
facilitate the Commission’s
1 16
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1
2
8
8
20
30
37
45
49
64
74
80
84
86
96
97
105
108
U.S.C. 825(b), 825f(a).
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 88 (Monday, May 7, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26672-26674]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10898]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
17 CFR Part 1
Fees for Reviews of the Rule Enforcement Programs of Designated
Contract Markets and Registered Futures Associations
AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
ACTION: Notice of FY 2011 schedule of fees.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission charges fees to designated contract markets and
registered futures associations to recover the costs incurred by the
Commission in the operation of its program of oversight of self-
regulatory organization rule enforcement programs, specifically
National Futures Association, a registered futures association, and the
designated contract markets. The calculation of the fee amounts charged
for FY 2011 by this notice is based upon an average of actual program
costs incurred during FY 2008, 2009, and 2010.
DATES: Effective Date: Each SRO is required to remit electronically the
fee applicable to it on or before July 6, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Carney, Chief Financial Officer,
Commodity Futures Trading Commission, (202) 418-5477, Three Lafayette
Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581. For information on
electronic payment, contact Jennifer Fleming, Three Lafayette Centre,
1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581, (202) 418-5034.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background Information
A. General
This notice relates to fees for the Commission's review of the rule
enforcement programs at the registered futures associations \1\ and
designated contract markets (DCM) each of which is a self-regulatory
organization (SRO) regulated by the Commission. The Commission
recalculates the fees charged each year to cover the costs of operating
this Commission program.\2\ All costs are accounted for by the
Commission's Budget Program Activity Codes (BPAC) system, formerly the
Management Accounting Structure Codes (MASC) system, which records each
employee's time for each pay period. The fees are set each year based
on direct program costs, plus an overhead factor. The Commission
calculates actual costs, then calculates an alternate fee taking volume
into account, then charges the lower of the two.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NFA is the only registered futures association.
\2\ See section 237 of the Futures Trading Act of 1982, 7 U.S.C.
16a, and 31 U.S.C. 9701. For a broader discussion of the history of
Commission fees, see 52 FR 46070, Dec. 4, 1987.
\3\ 58 FR 42643, Aug. 11, 1993 and 17 CFR part 1, app. B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 26673]]
B. Overhead Rate
The fees charged by the Commission to the SROs are designed to
recover program costs, including direct labor costs and overhead. The
overhead rate is calculated by dividing total Commission-wide overhead
direct program labor costs into the total amount of the Commission-wide
overhead pool. For this purpose, direct program labor costs are the
salary costs of personnel working in all Commission programs. Overhead
costs consist generally of the following Commission-wide costs:
indirect personnel costs (leave and benefits), rent, communications,
contract services, utilities, equipment, and supplies. This formula has
resulted in the following overhead rates for the most recent three
years (rounded to the nearest whole percent): 144 percent for fiscal
year 2008, 147 percent for fiscal year 2009, and 153 percent for fiscal
year 2010.
C. Conduct of SRO Rule Enforcement Reviews
Under the formula adopted by the Commission in 1993, the Commission
calculates the fee to recover the costs of its rule enforcement reviews
and examinations, based on the three-year average of the actual cost of
performing such reviews and examinations at each SRO. The cost of
operation of the Commission's SRO oversight program varies from SRO to
SRO, according to the size and complexity of each SRO's program. The
three-year averaging computation method is intended to smooth out year-
to-year variations in cost. Timing of the Commission's reviews and
examinations may affect costs--a review or examination may span two
fiscal years and reviews and examinations are not conducted at each SRO
each year.
As noted above, adjustments to actual costs may be made to relieve
the burden on an SRO with a disproportionately large share of program
costs. The Commission's formula provides for a reduction in the
assessed fee if an SRO has a smaller percentage of United States
industry contract volume than its percentage of overall Commission
oversight program costs. This adjustment reduces the costs so that, as
a percentage of total Commission SRO oversight program costs, they are
in line with the pro rata percentage for that SRO of United States
industry-wide contract volume.
The calculation is made as follows: The fee required to be paid to
the Commission by each DCM is equal to the lesser of actual costs based
on the three-year historical average of costs for that DCM or one-half
of average costs incurred by the Commission for each DCM for the most
recent three years, plus a pro rata share (based on average trading
volume for the most recent three years) of the aggregate of average
annual costs of all DCMs for the most recent three years. The formula
for calculating the second factor is: 0.5a + 0.5 vt = current fee. In
this formula, ``a'' equals the average annual costs, ``v'' equals the
percentage of total volume across DCMs over the last three years, and
``t'' equals the average annual costs for all DCMs. NFA has no
contracts traded; hence, its fee is based simply on costs for the most
recent three fiscal years. This table summarizes the data used in the
calculations of the resulting fee for each entity:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actual total costs 3-Year
--------------------------------------- average 3-Year % of Volume FY2011
actual volume adjusted Assessed
FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 costs costs fee
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBOE Futures................................................. ........... $519 ........... $173 0.057 $448 $173
Chicago Board of Trade....................................... $30,305 142,446 $87,953 86,901 27,706 218,442 86,901
Chicago Climate Exchange..................................... 23,590 2,129 ........... 8,573 0.025 4,444 4,444
Chicago Mercantile Exchange.................................. 13,511 341,186 882,542 412,413 54.224 548,690 412,413
ICE Future U.S............................................... 126,362 286,289 94,043 168,898 2.883 102,659 102,659
Kansas City Board of Trade................................... 78,321 2,888 227,296 102,835 0.139 52,294 52,294
Minneapolis Grain Exchange................................... 187,679 123,566 ........... 103,748 0.047 52,172 52,172
New York Mercantile Exchange................................. 497,654 15,948 596,767 370,123 14.214 274,838 274,838
North American Derivative Exchanges.......................... 25,175 ........... ........... 8,392 0.000 4,196 4,196
One Chicago.................................................. 3,471 ........... ........... 1,157 0.134 1,425 1,157
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 986,069 914,972 1,888,601 1,263,214 100 1,259,607 991,247
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Futures Association................................. 1,054,392 109,639 1,206,393 790,141 ........... ........... 790,141
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................................................... 2,040,460 1,024,611 3,094,994 2,053,355 ........... ........... 1,781,388
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An example of how the fee is calculated for one exchange, the
Chicago Board of Trade, is set forth here:
a. Actual three-year average costs equal $86,901.
b. The alternative computation is: (.5) ($86,901) + (.5) (.2771)
($1,263,214) = $218,442.
c. The fee is the lesser of a or b; in this case $86,901.
As noted above, the alternative calculation based on contracts
traded is not applicable to NFA because it is not a DCM and has no
contracts traded. The Commission's average annual cost for conducting
oversight review of the NFA rule enforcement program during fiscal
years 2008 through 2010 was $790,141 (one-third of $2,370,423). The fee
to be paid by the NFA for the current fiscal year is $790,141.
II. Schedule of Fees
Therefore, fees for the Commission's review of the rule enforcement
programs at the registered futures associations and DCMs regulated by
the Commission are as follows:
[[Page 26674]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011 Fee
lesser of
actual or
calculated
fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBOE Futures............................................... $173
Chicago Board of Trade..................................... 86,901
Chicago Climate Exchange................................... 4,444
Chicago Mercantile Exchange................................ 412,413
ICE Futures U.S............................................ 102,659
Kansas City Board of Trade................................. 52,294
Minneapolis Grain Exchange................................. 52,172
New York Mercantile Exchange............................... 274,838
North American Derivatives Exchange........................ 4,196
OneChicago................................................. 1,157
------------
Subtotal............................................... 991,247
------------
National Futures Association............................... 790,141
------------
Total.................................................. 1,781,388
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Payment Method
The Debt Collection Improvement Act (DCIA) requires deposits of
fees owed to the government by electronic transfer of funds (See 31
U.S.C. 3720). For information about electronic payments, please contact
Jennifer Fleming at (202) 418-5034 or jfleming@cftc.gov, or see the
CFTC Web site at www.cftc.gov, specifically, www.cftc.gov/cftc/cftcelectronicpayments.htm.
Issued in Washington, DC, on this 1st day of May, 2012, by the
Commission.
David Stawick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012-10898 Filed 5-4-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P