26672 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

1NFA 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. 

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RESCINDED: On March 28, 2012 (77 FR 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effective 31 May, 2012, are hereby rescinded 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 

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 

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

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 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 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 

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 

actual costs 

3-Year % of 

volume 

Volume 

adjusted 

costs 

FY2011 

Assessed 

FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 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: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

26674 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

1 16 U.S.C. 825(b), 825f(a). 

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 

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 

Ongoing Electronic Delivery of Data 

From Regional Transmission 

Organizations and Independent 

System Operators 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: 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 

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 ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 

II. Background ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 

III. Discussion ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 

A. Commission Authority and the Need for Market Data ....................................................................................................... 8 

B. Duplicative Requirements ..................................................................................................................................................... 20 

C. Confidentiality of Data .......................................................................................................................................................... 30 

D. Data Formatting ..................................................................................................................................................................... 37 

E. Web-Based Delivery ............................................................................................................................................................... 45 

F. Data Requested ....................................................................................................................................................................... 49 

G. Implementation Timeline and Phasing ................................................................................................................................ 64 

H. Ongoing Electronic Delivery ................................................................................................................................................. 74 

I. Future Specifications and Modifications of the Data and the Process for Delivery .......................................................... 80 

J. Technical Conference ............................................................................................................................................................. 84 

IV. Information Collection Statement ...................................................................................................................................................... 86 

V. Environmental Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................................... 96 

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act .................................................................................................................................................................. 97 

VII. Document Availability ...................................................................................................................................................................... 105 

VIII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification ............................................................................................................................... 108 

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 

1. In this final rule, the Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission 

(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 

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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES