6304 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 12 / Thursday, January 21, 2021 / Notices 

1National Futures Association is the only 

registered futures association. 

2See 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. 

providing written public comments will 

be limited to one comment per public 

comment period with no repetition of 

previous comments. Comments can also 

be submitted in writing during the 

public comment period through the 

webinar. Comments will be read into 

the record, transcribed, and become part 

of the meeting record. Due to time 

meeting constraints, all comments may 

not be addressed during the meeting. 

The Hydrographic Services Review 

Panel (HSRP) is a Federal Advisory 

Committee established to advise the 

Under Secretary of Commerce for 

Oceans and Atmosphere, the NOAA 

Administrator, on matters related to the 

responsibilities and authorities set forth 

in section 303 of the Hydrographic 

Services Improvement Act of 1998, as 

amended, and such other appropriate 

matters that the Under Secretary refers 

to the Panel for review and advice. 

Matters To Be Considered 

The panel is convening on issues 

relevant to NOAA’s navigation services, 

including stakeholder use of navigation 

services data, products and services, 

and other topics related to hydrographic 

surveys, nautical charting, the ongoing 

National Spatial Reference System 

(NSRS) modernization including 

changes to flood plain management, 

navigation services contributions to 

resilience and coastal data and 

information systems, coastal and ocean 

modeling, PORTS® (Physical 

Oceanographic Real-Time System) 

sensor enhancements and expansion, 

the projects of the NOAA-University of 

New Hampshire Joint Hydrographic 

Center Cooperative Agreement, the new 

NOAA five-year cooperative agreement 

with the University of Southern Florida 

to launch the Center for Ocean Mapping 

and Innovative Technologies (COMIT), 

updates on legislative and budget 

priorities, and other topics. Navigation 

services include the data, products, and 

services provided by the NOAA 

programs and activities that undertake 

geodetic observations, gravity modeling, 

coastal and shoreline mapping, 

bathymetric mapping and modeling, 

hydrographic surveying, nautical 

charting, tide and water level 

observations, current observations, 

flooding, resilience, inundation and sea 

level rise, marine and coastal modeling, 

geospatial and LIDAR data, and related 

topics. This suite of NOAA products 

and services support safe and efficient 

navigation, resilient coasts and 

communities, and the nationwide 

positioning information infrastructure to 

support America’s climate needs and 

commerce. The Panel will hear about 

the missions and uses of NOAA’s 

navigation services, the value these 

services bring, and what improvements 

could be made. Other matters may be 

considered. 

Special Accommodations 

This meeting is physically accessible 

to people with disabilities and there 

will be sign language interpretation and 

captioning services. Please direct 

requests for other auxiliary aids to 

Melanie.Colantuno@noaa.gov at least 10 

business days in advance of the 

meeting. 

Kathryn Ries, 

Deputy Director, Office of Coast Survey, 

National Ocean Service, National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2021–01193 Filed 1–19–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–JE–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

Fees for Reviews of the Rule 

Enforcement Programs of Designated 

Contract Markets and Registered 

Futures Associations 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of 2020 schedule of fees. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (‘‘CFTC’’ or 

‘‘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 (‘‘NFA’’), a 

registered futures association, and the 

designated contract markets. Fees 

collected from each self-regulatory 

organization are deposited in the 

Treasury of the United States as 

miscellaneous receipts. The calculation 

of the fee amounts charged for 2020 by 

this notice is based upon an average of 

actual program costs incurred during 

fiscal year (‘‘FY’’) 2017, FY 2018, and 

FY 2019. 

DATES: Each self-regulatory organization 

is required to remit electronically the 

applicable fee on or before March 22, 

2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anthony C. Thompson, Executive 

Director and Chief Administrative 

Officer, Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission; (202) 418–5697; Three 

Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20581. For information 

on electronic payment, contact Jennifer 

Fleming; (202) 418–5034; Three 

Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20581. 

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

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, and 

then charges the lower of the two.3

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 generally 

consist 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): 169 percent for FY 2017, 182 

percent for FY 2018, and 174 percent for 

FY 2019. 

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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 12 / Thursday, January 21, 2021 / Notices 6305 

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: 

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF DATA USED IN FEE CALCULATIONS

Actual total costs 3-Year 

average 

actual costs 

3-Year 

total 

volume % 

Adjusted 

volume 

costs 

2020 

Assessed 

FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 fee 

Cantor Futures Exchange, L.P. .................... $60,045 $56,551 ........................ $38,866 0.02 $19,527 $19,527 

CBOE Futures Exchange, LLC ..................... 31,026 16,033 40,517 29,192 1.40 21,600 21,600 

Chicago Board of Trade ................................ 96,442 2,296 22,835 40,525 32.69 183,313 40,525 

Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc. .............. 472,157 235,127 383,995 363,760 42.23 392,507 363,760 

Eris Exchange, LLC ...................................... 53,010 33,170 ........................ 28,727 0.01 14,397 14,397 

ICE Futures U.S., Inc. ................................... 199,090 50,096 73,464 107,550 6.86 87,993 87,993 

Minneapolis Grain Exchange, Inc. ................ 42,226 438 39,525 27,396 0.05 13,944 13,944 

Nasdaq OMX Futures Exchange, Inc. .......... 251,200 109,413 1,741 120,785 0.59 63,311 63,311 

New York Mercantile Exchange, Inc. ............ 212,798 3,397 45,425 87,206 12.77 107,290 87,206 

Nodal Exchange, LLC ................................... 100,600 33,162 2,312 45,358 0.06 22,996 22,996 

North American Derivatives Exchange, Inc. 84,666 6,986 135,159 75,604 0.22 38,891 38,891 

OneChicago, LLC .......................................... 36,444 61,276 ........................ 32,573 0.20 17,276 17,276 

Subtotal .................................................. 1,639,704 607,946 744,973 997,541 100.00 997,541 791,427 

National Futures Association ........................ 660,710 507,673 540,821 569,735 ........................ ........................ 569,735 

Total ....................................................... 2,300,414 1,115,619 1,285,794 1,567,276 100.00 997,541 1,361,161 

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 = 

$40,525 

b. The alternative computation is: [(.5) 

($40,525)] + (.5) [(.3269048) 

($997,541)] = $183,313 

c. The fee is the lesser of a or b; in this 

case $40,525 

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 2017 through 2019 was $569,735. 

The fee to be paid by the NFA for the 

current fiscal year is $569,735. 

II. Schedule of Fees 

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: 

TABLE 2—SCHEDULE OF FEES

3-Year 

average 

actual costs 

3-Year 

total 

volume % 

Adjusted 

volume costs 

2020 

Assessed fee 

Cantor Futures Exchange, L.P. ....................................................................... $38,866 0.02 $19,527 $19,527 

CBOE Futures Exchange, LLC ....................................................................... 29,192 1.40 21,600 21,600 

Chicago Board of Trade .................................................................................. 40,525 32.69 183,313 40,525 

Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc. ................................................................. 363,760 42.23 392,507 363,760

Eris Exchange, LLC ......................................................................................... 28,727 0.01 14,397 14,397 

ICE Futures U.S., Inc. ..................................................................................... 107,550 6.86 87,993 87,993 

Minneapolis Grain Exchange, Inc. ................................................................... 27,396 0.05 13,944 13,944 

Nasdaq OMX Futures Exchange, Inc. ............................................................. 120,785 0.59 63,311 63,311 

New York Mercantile Exchange, Inc. .............................................................. 87,206 12.77 107,290 87,206 

Nodal Exchange, LLC ...................................................................................... 45,358 0.06 22,996 22,996 

North American Derivatives Exchange, Inc. .................................................... 75,604 0.22 38,891 38,891 

OneChicago, LLC ............................................................................................ 32,573 0.20 17,276 17,276 

Subtotal ..................................................................................................... 997,541 100.00 997,541 791,427 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
6306 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 12 / Thursday, January 21, 2021 / Notices 

1 In this document, a consumer with ‘‘limited 

English proficiency’’ or a ‘‘limited English 

proficient’’ (LEP) consumer means a person who 

has a limited ability to read, write, speak, or 

understand English. 2See Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 

Spotlight on serving limited English proficient 

consumers: Language access in the consumer 

financial marketplace, 6–7 (Nov. 2017), https://

files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_

spotlight-serving-lep-consumers_112017.pdf. 3 Id. at 12. 

4See Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 

Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 111–203 

(2010), sec. 1021 (Dodd-Frank Act); see also CFPB 

Director Kathleen Kraninger, Kraninger Marks 

Second Year as Director of the Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau (Dec. 11, 2020), https://

www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/ 

kraninger-marks-second-year-director-consumerfinancial-protection-bureau/. 

5Supra note 2. 

6Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 

Spotlight on serving limited English proficient 

consumers: Language access in the consumer 

financial marketplace, 6–7 (Nov. 2017), https://

files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_

spotlight-serving-lep-consumers_112017.pdf. 

7 Dodd-Frank Act, sec. 1013(c)(2)(A), 124 Stat. 

1376 (2010) (codified as 12 U.S.C. 5493(c)(2)(A)). 

8 Id. at sec. 1036 (codified as 12 U.S.C. 5536). 

9 15 U.S.C 1691 et seq. 

10U.S. Census Bureau, 2019 American 

Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1601: 

TABLE 2—SCHEDULE OF FEES—Continued 

3-Year 

average 

actual costs 

3-Year 

total 

volume % 

Adjusted 

volume costs 

2020 

Assessed fee 

National Futures Association ........................................................................... 569,735 ........................ ........................ 569,735 

Total .......................................................................................................... 1,567,276 100.00 997,541 1,361,161 

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 website at https://

www.cftc.gov, specifically, https://

www.cftc.gov/cftc/ 

cftcelectronicpayments.htm. 

Fees collected from each selfregulatory organization shall be 

deposited in the Treasury of the United 

States as miscellaneous receipts. See 7 

U.S.C 16a. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on this 13th day 

of January, 2021, by the Commission. 

Robert Sidman, 

Deputy Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2021–01145 Filed 1–19–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–P 

BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL 

PROTECTION 

Statement Regarding the Provision of 

Financial Products and Services to 

Consumers With Limited English 

Proficiency 

AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Consumer 

Financial Protection (Bureau) is issuing 

this Statement Regarding the Provision 

of Financial Products and Services to 

Consumers with Limited English 

Proficiency (Statement) to encourage 

financial institutions to better serve 

consumers with limited English 

proficiency (LEP) and to provide 

principles and guidelines to assist 

financial institutions in complying with 

the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 

Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank 

Act), the Equal Credit Opportunity Act 

(ECOA), and other applicable laws. 

DATES: The Bureau released this 

Statement on its website on January 13, 

2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ena 

P. Koukourinis, Senior Counsel, Office 

of Fair Lending and Equal Opportunity, 

at CFPB_FairLending@cfpb.gov or 202– 

435–7000. If you require this document 

in an alternative electronic format, 

please contact CFPB_Accessibility@

cfpb.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Statement Regarding the Provision of 

Financial Products and Services to 

Consumers With Limited English 

Proficiency 

A. Background 

The Bureau works to ensure a fair, 

transparent, and competitive consumer 

financial marketplace. To that end, the 

Bureau seeks to promote access to 

financial products and services for all 

consumers, including LEP consumers.1

Despite having considerable credit 

needs and representing a large segment 

of the U.S. population, LEP consumers 

often encounter significant barriers to 

participating in the consumer financial 

marketplace.2 Many of these challenges 

stem from language access issues— 

financial disclosures and written 

documents are generally not available in 

languages other than English and some 

financial institutions do not have 

bilingual employees or access to 

interpretation services.3

Recognizing the compliance risks and 

uncertainty that many financial 

institutions raise as challenges to better 

serving LEP consumers in non-English 

languages, the Bureau is issuing this 

Statement to outline compliance 

principles and guidelines that 

encourage financial institutions to 

expand access to products and services 

for LEP consumers. In doing so, the 

Bureau seeks to: (1) Promote access to 

financial products for all consumers; (2) 

facilitate compliance by providing clear 

rules of the road; and (3) educate and 

empower consumers to make better 

informed financial decisions.4 Financial 

institutions play an important role in 

building a more inclusive financial 

system and presenting opportunities for 

LEP consumers to build their financial 

capabilities.5 The effective and 

responsible integration of LEP 

consumers into the financial 

marketplace has the potential to create 

positive benefits for consumers and the 

financial services industry alike.6

The Dodd-Frank Act emphasizes the 

Bureau’s role in ensuring ‘‘fair, 

equitable, and nondiscriminatory access 

to credit.’’ 7 Consistent with that 

purpose, the Bureau encourages 

financial institutions to promote access 

to financial products and services for all 

consumers by better serving LEP 

consumers. In providing such assistance 

and serving LEP consumers, financial 

institutions must also comply with 

Dodd-Frank Act prohibitions against 

engaging in any unfair, deceptive, or 

abusive act or practice (UDAAP) 8 and 

the ECOA.9 This Statement provides 

guidance on how financial institutions 

can provide access to credit in 

languages other than English in a 

manner that is beneficial to consumers, 

while taking steps to ensure financial 

institutions’ actions are compliant with 

the ECOA, the prohibitions against 

UDAAPs, and other applicable laws. 

Approximately 22 percent of the U.S. 

population over the age of 5 (in all, 67.8 

million people) speak a language other 

than English at home and, of these, 37.6 

percent are LEP.10 LEP consumers face 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES