71338 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 198 / Monday, October 16, 2023 / Notices 

1For purposes of acoustic exposure modeling, the 

GOM was divided into seven zones. Zone 1 is not 

included in the geographic scope of the rule. 

2For purposes of acoustic exposure modeling, 

seasons include winter (December–March) and 

summer (April–November). 

Dated: October 11, 2023. 

Jennifer M. Wallace, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2023–22788 Filed 10–13–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XD302] 

Taking and Importing Marine 

Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals 

Incidental to Geophysical Surveys 

Related to Oil and Gas Activities in the 

Gulf of Mexico 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of issuance of Letter of 

Authorization. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA), as amended, its implementing 

regulations, and NMFS’ MMPA 

Regulations for Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to Geophysical 

Surveys Related to Oil and Gas 

Activities in the Gulf of Mexico, 

notification is hereby given that a Letter 

of Authorization (LOA) has been issued 

to bp Exploration and Production Inc. 

(bp) for the take of marine mammals 

incidental to geophysical survey activity 

in the Gulf of Mexico. 

DATES: The LOA is effective from 

November 1, 2023, through July 31, 

2024. 

ADDRESSES: The LOA, LOA request, and 

supporting documentation are available 

online at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/ 

incidental-take-authorization-oil-andgas-industry-geophysical-surveyactivity-gulf-mexico. In case of problems 

accessing these documents, please call 

the contact listed below (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jenna Harlacher, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the 

MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct 

the Secretary of Commerce to allow, 

upon request, the incidental, but not 

intentional, taking of small numbers of 

marine mammals by U.S. citizens who 

engage in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) within a specified 

geographical region if certain findings 

are made and either regulations are 

issued or, if the taking is limited to 

harassment, a notice of a proposed 

authorization is provided to the public 

for review. 

An authorization for incidental 

takings shall be granted if NMFS finds 

that the taking will have a negligible 

impact on the species or stock(s), will 

not have an unmitigable adverse impact 

on the availability of the species or 

stock(s) for subsistence uses (where 

relevant), and if the permissible 

methods of taking and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of such takings are set 

forth. NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible 

impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact 

resulting from the specified activity that 

cannot be reasonably expected to, and is 

not reasonably likely to, adversely affect 

the species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival. 

Except with respect to certain 

activities not pertinent here, the MMPA 

defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: any act of 

pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) 

has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has 

the potential to disturb a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild by causing disruption of behavioral 

patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering (Level B 

harassment). 

On January 19, 2021, we issued a final 

rule with regulations to govern the 

unintentional taking of marine 

mammals incidental to geophysical 

survey activities conducted by oil and 

gas industry operators, and those 

persons authorized to conduct activities 

on their behalf (collectively ‘‘industry 

operators’’), in U.S. waters of the Gulf of 

Mexico (GOM) over the course of 5 

years (86 FR 5322, January 19, 2021). 

The rule was based on our findings that 

the total taking from the specified 

activities over the 5-year period will 

have a negligible impact on the affected 

species or stock(s) of marine mammals 

and will not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of 

those species or stocks for subsistence 

uses. The rule became effective on April 

19, 2021. 

Our regulations at 50 CFR 217.180 et 

seq. allow for the issuance of LOAs to 

industry operators for the incidental 

take of marine mammals during 

geophysical survey activities and 

prescribe the permissible methods of 

taking and other means of effecting the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

marine mammal species or stocks and 

their habitat (often referred to as 

mitigation), as well as requirements 

pertaining to the monitoring and 

reporting of such taking. Under 50 CFR 

217.186(e), issuance of an LOA shall be 

based on a determination that the level 

of taking will be consistent with the 

findings made for the total taking 

allowable under these regulations and a 

determination that the amount of take 

authorized under the LOA is of no more 

than small numbers. 

Summary of Request and Analysis 

Bp plans to conduct a Zero Offset 

vertical seismic profile (VSP) survey 

within Mississippi Canyon Block 956. 

See section 1.1 of bp’s application for a 

map. Bp plans to use a 12-element, 

2,400 cubic inch (in3) airgun array. 

Approximate water depths of the survey 

area is 2,000 meters (m). Please see bp’s 

application for additional detail. 

Consistent with the preamble to the 

final rule, the survey effort proposed by 

bp in its LOA request was used to 

develop LOA-specific take estimates 

based on the acoustic exposure 

modeling results described in the 

preamble (86 FR 5322, 5398, January 19, 

2021). In order to generate the 

appropriate take number for 

authorization, the following information 

was considered: (1) survey type; (2) 

location (by modeling zone 1); (3) 

number of days; and (4) season.2 The 

acoustic exposure modeling performed 

in support of the rule provides 24-hour 

exposure estimates for each species, 

specific to each modeled survey type in 

each zone and season. 

No VSP surveys were included in the 

modeled survey types, and use of 

existing proxies (i.e., 2D, 3D NAZ, 3D 

WAZ, Coil) is generally conservative for 

use in evaluation of these survey types. 

Summary descriptions of these modeled 

survey geometries are available in the 

preamble to the proposed rule (83 FR 

29212, 29220, June 22, 2018). Coil was 

selected as the best available proxy 

survey type for bp’s VSP survey because 

the spatial coverage of the planned 

surveys is most similar to the coil 

survey pattern. For the planned survey, 

the seismic source array will be 

deployed from a drilling rig at or near 

the borehole, with the seismic receivers 

(i.e., geophones) deployed in the 

borehole on wireline at specified depth 

intervals. The zero offset VSP will be 

stationary. The coil survey pattern in 

the model was assumed to cover 

approximately 144 square kilometers 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 198 / Monday, October 16, 2023 / Notices 71339 

3However, note that these species have been 

observed over a greater range of water depths in the 

GOM than have killer whales. 

(km2) per day (compared with 

approximately 795 km2, 199 km2, and 

845 km2 per day for the 2D, 3D NAZ, 

and 3D WAZ survey patterns, 

respectively). Among the different 

parameters of the modeled survey 

patterns (e.g., area covered, line spacing, 

number of sources, shot interval, total 

simulated pulses), NMFS considers area 

covered per day to be most influential 

on daily modeled exposures exceeding 

Level B harassment criteria. Because 

bp’s planned survey is expected to cover 

no additional area as a stationary 

source, the coil proxy is most 

representative of the effort planned by 

bp in terms of predicted Level B 

harassment. 

In addition, all available acoustic 

exposure modeling results assume use 

of a 72-element, 8,000 in3 array. Thus, 

estimated take numbers for this LOA are 

considered conservative due to the 

differences in both the airgun array (12 

elements, 2,400 in3) and daily survey 

area planned by bp (as mentioned 

above), as compared to those modeled 

for the rule. 

The survey is planned to occur for a 

maximum of 2 days in Zone 7. The 

survey may occur in either season. 

Therefore, the take estimates for each 

species are based on the season that has 

the greater value for the species (i.e., 

winter or summer). 

Additionally, for some species, take 

estimates based solely on the modeling 

yielded results that are not realistically 

likely to occur when considered in light 

of other relevant information available 

during the rulemaking process regarding 

marine mammal occurrence in the 

GOM. The approach used in the 

acoustic exposure modeling, in which 

seven modeling zones were defined over 

the U.S. GOM, necessarily averages finescale information about marine mammal 

distribution over the large area of each 

modeling zone. This can result in 

unrealistic projections regarding the 

likelihood of encountering particularly 

rare species and/or species not expected 

to occur outside particular habitats. 

Thus, although the modeling conducted 

for the rule is a natural starting point for 

estimating take, our rule acknowledged 

that other information could be 

considered (see, e.g., 86 FR 5322, 5442 

(January 19, 2021), discussing the need 

to provide flexibility and make efficient 

use of previous public and agency 

review of other information and 

identifying that additional public 

review is not necessary unless the 

model or inputs used differ 

substantively from those that were 

previously reviewed by NMFS and the 

public). For this survey, NMFS has 

other relevant information reviewed 

during the rulemaking that indicates use 

of the acoustic exposure modeling to 

generate a take estimate for killer whales 

produces results inconsistent with what 

is known regarding their occurrence in 

the GOM. Accordingly, we have 

adjusted the calculated take estimates 

for that species as described below. 

Killer whales are the most rarely 

encountered species in the GOM, 

typically in deep waters of the central 

GOM (Roberts et al., 2015; Maze-Foley 

and Mullin, 2006). As discussed in the 

final rule, the density models produced 

by Roberts et al. (2016) provide the best 

available scientific information 

regarding predicted density patterns of 

cetaceans in the U.S. GOM. The 

predictions represent the output of 

models derived from multi-year 

observations and associated 

environmental parameters that 

incorporate corrections for detection 

bias. However, in the case of killer 

whales, the model is informed by few 

data, as indicated by the coefficient of 

variation associated with the abundance 

predicted by the model (0.41, the 

second-highest of any GOM species 

model; Roberts et al., 2016). The 

model’s authors noted the expected 

non-uniform distribution of this rarelyencountered species (as discussed 

above) and expressed that, due to the 

limited data available to inform the 

model, it ‘‘should be viewed cautiously’’ 

(Roberts et al., 2015). 

NOAA surveys in the GOM from 

1992–2009 reported only 16 sightings of 

killer whales, with an additional 3 

encounters during more recent survey 

effort from 2017–18 (Waring et al., 2013; 

https://www.boem.gov/gommapps). 

Two other species were also observed 

on less than 20 occasions during the 

1992–2009 NOAA surveys (Fraser’s 

dolphin and false killer whale 3). 

However, observational data collected 

by protected species observers (PSOs) 

on industry geophysical survey vessels 

from 2002–2015 distinguish the killer 

whale in terms of rarity. During this 

period, killer whales were encountered 

on only 10 occasions, whereas the next 

most rarely encountered species 

(Fraser’s dolphin) was recorded on 69 

occasions (Barkaszi and Kelly, 2019). 

The false killer whale and pygmy killer 

whale were the next most rarely 

encountered species, with 110 records 

each. The killer whale was the species 

with the lowest detection frequency 

during each period over which PSO data 

were synthesized (2002–2008 and 2009– 

2015). This information qualitatively 

informed our rulemaking process, as 

discussed at 86 FR 5322, 5334 (January 

19, 2021), and similarly informs our 

analysis here. 

The rarity of encounter during seismic 

surveys is not likely to be the product 

of high bias on the probability of 

detection. Unlike certain cryptic species 

with high detection bias, such as Kogia 

spp. or beaked whales, or deep-diving 

species with high availability bias, such 

as beaked whales or sperm whales, 

killer whales are typically available for 

detection when present and are easily 

observed. Roberts et al. (2015) stated 

that availability is not a major factor 

affecting detectability of killer whales 

from shipboard surveys, as they are not 

a particularly long-diving species. Baird 

et al. (2005) reported that mean dive 

durations for 41 fish-eating killer whales 

for dives greater than or equal to 1 

minute in duration was 2.3–2.4 minutes, 

and Hooker et al. (2012) reported that 

killer whales spent 78 percent of their 

time at depths between 0–10 m. 

Similarly, Kvadsheim et al. (2012) 

reported data from a study of 4 killer 

whales, noting that the whales 

performed 20 times as many dives to 1– 

30 m depth than to deeper waters, with 

an average depth during those most 

common dives of approximately 3 m. 

In summary, killer whales are the 

most rarely encountered species in the 

GOM and typically occur only in 

particularly deep water. This survey 

would take place in deep waters that 

would overlap with depths in which 

killer whales typically occur. While this 

information is reflected through the 

density model informing the acoustic 

exposure modeling results, there is 

relatively high uncertainty associated 

with the model for this species, and the 

acoustic exposure modeling applies 

mean distribution data over areas where 

the species is in fact less likely to occur. 

In addition, as noted above in relation 

to the general take estimation 

methodology, the assumed proxy source 

(72-element, 8,000-in3 array) results in a 

significant overestimate of the actual 

potential for take to occur. NMFS’ 

determination in reflection of the 

information discussed above, which 

informed the final rule, is that use of the 

generic acoustic exposure modeling 

results for killer whales would result in 

estimated take numbers that are 

inconsistent with the assumptions made 

in the rule regarding expected killer 

whale take (86 FR 5322, 5403, January 

19, 2021). 

In past authorizations, NMFS has 

often addressed situations involving the 

low likelihood of encountering a rare 

species, such as killer whales, in the 

GOM through authorization of take of a 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
71340 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 198 / Monday, October 16, 2023 / Notices 

single group of average size (i.e., 

representing a single potential 

encounter). See 83 FR 63268, December 

7, 2018. See also 86 FR 29090, May 28, 

2021; 85 FR 55645, September 9, 2020. 

For bp’s survey, use of the exposure 

modeling produces an estimate of two 

killer whale exposures. Given the 

foregoing discussion, it is unlikely that 

any killer whales would be encountered 

during this 2 day survey, and 

accordingly, no take of killer whales is 

authorized through the bp LOA. 

In addition, in this case, use of the 

exposure modeling produces results that 

are smaller than average GOM group 

sizes for multiple species (Maze-Foley 

and Mullin, 2006). NMFS’ typical 

practice in such a situation is to 

increase exposure estimates to the 

assumed average group size for a species 

in order to ensure that, if the species is 

encountered, exposures will not exceed 

the authorized take number. However, 

other relevant considerations here lead 

to a determination that increasing the 

estimated exposures to average group 

sizes would likely lead to an 

overestimate of actual potential take. In 

this circumstance, the very short survey 

duration (maximum of 2 days) and 

relatively small Level B harassment 

isopleths produced through use of the 

12-element, 2,400-in3 airgun array 

(compared with the modeled 72- 

element, 8,000 in3 array) mean that it is 

unlikely that certain species would be 

encountered at all, much less that the 

encounter would result in exposure of a 

greater number of individuals than is 

estimated through use of the exposure 

modeling results. As a result, in this 

case NMFS has not increased the 

estimated exposure values to assumed 

average group sizes in authorizing take. 

Based on the results of our analysis, 

NMFS has determined that the level of 

taking authorized through the LOA is 

consistent with the findings made for 

the total taking allowable under the 

regulations for the affected species or 

stocks of marine mammals. See Table 1 

in this notice and Table 9 of the rule (86 

FR 5322, January 19, 2021). 

Small Numbers Determination 

Under the GOM rule, NMFS may not 

authorize incidental take of marine 

mammals in an LOA if it will exceed 

‘‘small numbers.’’ In short, when an 

acceptable estimate of the individual 

marine mammals taken is available, if 

the estimated number of individual 

animals taken is up to, but not greater 

than, one-third of the best available 

abundance estimate, NMFS will 

determine that the numbers of marine 

mammals taken of a species or stock are 

small. For more information please see 

NMFS’ discussion of the MMPA’s small 

numbers requirement provided in the 

final rule (86 FR 5322, 5438, January 19, 

2021). 

The take numbers for authorization, 

which are determined as described 

above, are used by NMFS in making the 

necessary small numbers 

determinations, through comparison 

with the best available abundance 

estimates (see discussion at 86 FR 5322, 

5391, January 19, 2021). For this 

comparison, NMFS’ approach is to use 

the maximum theoretical population, 

determined through review of current 

stock assessment reports (SAR; https:// 

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments) and modelpredicted abundance information 

(https://seamap.env.duke.edu/models/ 

Duke/GOM/). For the latter, for taxa 

where a density surface model could be 

produced, we use the maximum mean 

seasonal (i.e., 3-month) abundance 

prediction for purposes of comparison 

as a precautionary smoothing of monthto-month fluctuations and in 

consideration of a corresponding lack of 

data in the literature regarding seasonal 

distribution of marine mammals in the 

GOM. Information supporting the small 

numbers determinations is provided in 

Table 1. 

TABLE 1—TAKE ANALYSIS

Species Authorized 

take 1 Abundance 2 Percent abundance 

Rice’s whale ................................................................................................................................. 4 0 51 n/a 

Sperm whale ................................................................................................................................ 11 2,207 0.1 

Kogia spp. .................................................................................................................................... 3 6 4,373 0.1 

Beaked whales ............................................................................................................................ 94 3,768 0.3 

Rough-toothed dolphin ................................................................................................................ 17 4,853 0.1 

Bottlenose dolphin ....................................................................................................................... 0 176,108 n/a 

Clymene dolphin .......................................................................................................................... 4 46 11,895 0.1 

Atlantic spotted dolphin ............................................................................................................... 0 74,785 n/a 

Pantropical spotted dolphin ......................................................................................................... 456 102,361 0.1 

Spinner dolphin ............................................................................................................................ 4 11 25,114 0 

Striped dolphin ............................................................................................................................. 4 24 5,229 0.1 

Fraser’s dolphin ........................................................................................................................... 4 8 1,665 0.1 

Risso’s dolphin ............................................................................................................................. 4 7 3,764 0.1 

Melon-headed whale ................................................................................................................... 4 30 7,003 0.1 

Pygmy killer whale ....................................................................................................................... 4 14 2,126 0.2 

False killer whale ......................................................................................................................... 4 16 3,204 0.1 

Killer whale .................................................................................................................................. 4 0 267 n/a 

Short-finned pilot whale ............................................................................................................... 4 2 1,981 0 

1Scalar ratios were not applied in this case due to brief survey duration. 

2Best abundance estimate. For most taxa, the best abundance estimate for purposes of comparison with take estimates is considered here to 

be the model-predicted abundance (Roberts et al., 2016). For those taxa where a density surface model predicting abundance by month was 

produced, the maximum mean seasonal abundance was used. For those taxa where abundance is not predicted by month, only mean annual 

abundance is available. For Rice’s whale and the killer whale, the larger estimated SAR abundance estimate is used. 3 Includes 1 take by Level A harassment and 5 takes by Level B harassment. 

4 Modeled exposure estimate less than assumed average group size (Maze-Foley and Mullin, 2006). 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of bp’s proposed survey activity 

described in its LOA application and 

the anticipated take of marine 

mammals, NMFS finds that small 

numbers of marine mammals will be 

taken relative to the affected species or 

stock sizes and therefore is of no more 

than small numbers. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 198 / Monday, October 16, 2023 / Notices 71341 

1 44 U.S.C. 3512, 5 CFR 1320.5(b)(2)(i) and 

1320.8(b)(3)(vi). 

Authorization 

NMFS has determined that the level 

of taking for this LOA request is 

consistent with the findings made for 

the total taking allowable under the 

incidental take regulations and that the 

amount of take authorized under the 

LOA is of no more than small numbers. 

Accordingly, we have issued an LOA to 

bp authorizing the take of marine 

mammals incidental to its geophysical 

survey activity, as described above. 

Dated: October 10, 2023. 

Kimberly Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2023–22761 Filed 10–13–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

Sunshine Act Meetings 

TIME AND DATE: 9:00 a.m. EDT, Friday, 

October 20, 2023. 

PLACE: Virtual meeting. 

STATUS: Closed. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Enforcement matters. In the event that 

the time, date, or location of this 

meeting changes, an announcement of 

the change, along with the new time, 

date, and/or place of the meeting will be 

posted on the Commission’s website at 

https://www.cftc.gov/. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Christopher Kirkpatrick, 202–418–5964. 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b. 

Dated: October 11, 2023. 

Christopher Kirkpatrick, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2023–22837 Filed 10–12–23; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Notice of Intent To Extend 

Collection 3038–0062: Off-Exchange 

Foreign Currency Transactions 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (‘‘CFTC’’ or 

‘‘Commission’’) is announcing an 

opportunity for public comment on the 

proposed renewal of a collection of 

certain information by the agency. 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(‘‘PRA’’), Federal agencies are required 

to publish notice in the Federal Register 

concerning each proposed collection of 

information, including a proposed 

extension of an existing collection of 

information, and to allow 60 days for 

public comment. This notice solicits 

comments on the collection of 

information provided for certain of the 

Commission’s regulations under the 

Commodity Exchange Act (‘‘CEA’’) 

relating to off-exchange foreign currency 

transactions. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before December 15, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by ‘‘OMB Control No. 3038– 

0062’’ by any of the following methods: 

• The Agency’s website, at https://

comments.cftc.gov/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

through the website. 

• Mail: Christopher Kirkpatrick, 

Secretary of the Commission, 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 

1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 

20581. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as 

‘‘Mail’’ above. 

Please submit your comments using 

only one method. All comments must be 

submitted in English, or if not, 

accompanied by an English translation. 

Comments will be posted as received to 

https://www.cftc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Philip Newsom, Special Counsel, 

Market Participants Division, 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, (202) 418–5301, or 

pnewsom@cftc.gov, and refer to OMB 

Control No. 3038–0062. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., Federal 

agencies must obtain approval from the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(‘‘OMB’’) for each collection of 

information they conduct or sponsor. 

‘‘Collection of Information’’ is defined 

in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3 

and includes agency requests or 

requirements that members of the public 

submit reports, keep records, or provide 

information to a third party. Section 

3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(2)(A), requires Federal agencies 

to provide a 60-day notice in the 

Federal Register concerning each 

proposed collection of information, 

including each proposed extension of an 

existing collection of information, 

before submitting the collection to OMB 

for approval. To comply with this 

requirement, the CFTC is publishing 

notice of the proposed extension of the 

existing collections of information listed 

below. An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number.1

Title: Off-Exchange Foreign Currency 

Transactions (OMB Control No. 3038– 

0062). This is a request for an extension 

of a currently approved information 

collection. 

Abstract: Part 5 of the Commission’s 

regulations under the CEA establishes 

rules applicable to retail foreign 

exchange dealers (‘‘RFEDs’’), futures 

commission merchants (‘‘FCMs’’), 

introducing brokers (‘‘IBs’’), commodity 

trading advisors (‘‘CTAs’’), and 

commodity pool operators (‘‘CPOs’’) 

engaged in the offer and sale of offexchange forex contracts to retail 

customers. Specifically: 

• Regulation 5.5 requires RFEDs, 

FCMs, and IBs to distribute risk 

disclosure statements to new retail forex 

customers. 

• Regulation 5.6 requires RFEDs and 

FCMs to report any failures to maintain 

the minimum capital required by 

Commission regulations. 

• Regulation 5.8 requires RFEDs and 

FCMs to calculate their total retail forex 

obligation. 

• Regulation 5.10 requires RFEDs to 

maintain and preserve certain risk 

assessment documentation. 

• Regulation 5.11(a)(1) requires 

RFEDs to submit certain risk assessment 

documentation to the Commission 

within 60 days of the effective date of 

their registration. 

• Regulation 5.11(a)(2) requires 

RFEDs to submit certain financial 

documentation to the Commission 

within 105 calendar days of the end of 

each fiscal year. RFEDs must also 

submit additional information, if 

requested, regarding affiliates’ financial 

impact on an RFED’s organizational 

structure. 

• Regulation 5.12(a) requires RFED 

applicants to submit a Form 1–FR–FCM 

concurrently with their registration 

application. 

• Regulation 5.12(b) requires 

registered RFEDs to file a Form 1–FR– 

FCM on a monthly and annual basis. 

• Regulation 5.12(g) states that, in the 

event that an RFED cannot file its Form 

1–FR–FCM for any period within the 

time specified in Regulation 5.12(b), the 

RFED may file an application for an 

extension of time with its self-regulatory 

organization. 

• Regulation 5.13(a) requires RFEDs 

and FCMs to provide monthly account 

statements to their customers. 

• Regulation 5.13(b) requires RFEDs 

and FCMs to provide confirmation 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1