Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

1

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 

17 CFR Part 17

RIN 3038-AC22 

Large Trader Reporting Requirements

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission” or “CFTC”) is 

proposing revisions to the Commission’s regulations that set forth large trader position reporting 

requirements for futures and options. First, the Commission is proposing to remove the outdated 

80-character submission standard in regulation 17.00(g) and delegate authority to the Office of 

Data and Technology to designate a modern submission standard for reports required to be 

submitted under regulation 17.00(a). Second, the Commission is proposing to replace the data 

fields enumerated in regulation 17.00(g) with an appendix specifying applicable data elements and 

a separate Part 17 Guidebook specifying the form and manner for reporting. These revisions would 

modernize Part 17 large trader position reporting and align it with other reporting structures set

out in the Commission’s regulations.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before [INSERT DATE 60 DAYS AFTER 

DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by “Large Trader Reporting 

Requirements, RIN 3038-AC22,” by any of the following methods:

• CFTC Comments Portal: https://comments.cftc.gov/. Select the “Submit Comments” link 

for this rulemaking and follow the instructions on the Public Comment Form.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

2

• Mail: Send to 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 of these methods. To avoid possible delays 

with mail or in-person deliveries, submissions through the CFTC Comments Portal are 

encouraged. 

All comments must be submitted in English, or if not, accompanied by an English 

translation. Comments will be posted as received to https://comments.cftc.gov. You should submit 

only information that you wish to make available publicly. If you wish the Commission to consider 

information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 

(“FOIA”), a petition for confidential treatment of the exempt information may be submitted 

according to the procedures established in § 145.9 of the Commission's regulations.1

The Commission reserves the right, but shall have no obligation, to review, pre-screen, 

filter, redact, refuse, or remove any or all submissions from https://www.comments.cftc.gov that it 

may deem to be inappropriate for publication, such as obscene language. All submissions that have 

been redacted or removed that contain comments on the merits of the rulemaking will be retained 

in the public comment file and will be considered as required under the Administrative Procedure 

Act and other applicable laws, and may be accessible under FOIA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Owen Kopon, Associate Chief Counsel, at 

(202) 418-5360 or okopon@cftc.gov, Paul Chaffin, Assistant Chief Counsel, at (202) 418-5185 or 

pchaffin@cftc.gov, Division of Market Oversight, James Fay, IT Specialist, at (202) 418-5293 or 

 

1 17 CFR 145.9.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

3

jfay@cftc.gov, Division of Data, or Daniel Prager, Research Economist, (202) 418-5801 or 

dprager@cftc.gov, Office of the Chief Economist, in each case at the Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 20581.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

I. Background 

A. Introduction

Part 17 of the Commission’s regulations governs large trader reporting for futures and 

options.

2

 Among other things, those rules require futures commission merchants (“FCMs”), 

foreign brokers, clearing members, and certain reporting markets 3(FCMs, foreign brokers, 

clearing members, and such reporting markets are collectively referred to herein as “reporting 

firms”) to report daily position information of the largest futures and options traders to the 

Commission.4 

The Commission uses these regulation 17.00(a) large trader reports to carry out its market 

surveillance programs, which include detection and prevention of price manipulation, as well as 

enforcement of speculative limits.5 Among other things, data reported under Part 17 enable the 

Commission to identify large positions in single markets or across markets, including by

aggregating the positions of a particular beneficial owner across multiple accounts held with 

multiple clearing members. In addition to supporting the Commission’s surveillance programs, 

aggregated position data collected under Part 17 serves as the basis of the Commission’s weekly 

 

2 17 CFR Part 17.

3 For exclusively self-cleared contracts, designated contract markets (“DCMs”) must report data required to be 

reported under regulation 17.00(a) on behalf of clearing members. See 17 CFR 17.00(i).

4 17 CFR 17.00(a).

5 See, e.g., Final Rule, Reports; General Provisions; Adoption of Final Rules, 49 FR 46116, 46116 (Nov. 23, 1984).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

4

Commitments of Traders (“COT”) report.6 Historically, a wide range of both commercial and 

speculative traders have used the COT report for a variety of purposes related to their trading 

activities.7 Finally, Part 17 data is an important source of data for fulfillment of the Commission’s 

market analysis program and to support Commission research projects. 

Since the 1980s, regulation 17.00(g) has set forth both the submission standard and data 

fields to be used in regulation 17.00(a) large trader reports. 8 Regulation 17.00(g) requires

reporting firms to submit data in a highly-specified 80-character record format that is unique to 

regulation 17.00(a) large trader reports. As technology and markets have evolved, this record 

format has become outdated. It does not accommodate information needed to represent certain 

contracts, and necessitates manual work by staff to validate and ingest data.9 The Commission is 

issuing a proposal to update data reporting under regulation 17.00(a) by removing regulation

17.00(g)’s 80-character record format and delegating authority to the Director of the Office of Data 

and Technology to designate a modern data submission standard. Additionally, the Commission 

proposes to replace the data fields enumerated in that regulation 17.00(g) record format with a

proposed Appendix C to Part 17 specifying the data elements required to be reported, and to 

 

6 See, e.g., Comprehensive Review of the Commitments of Traders Reporting Program, 71 FR 35627, 35630 (June 

21, 2006) (stating that the Commission generates the COT report using Part 17 data); Final rule and corrections, 

Reporting Requirements for Contract Markets, Futures Commission Merchants, Members of Exchanges and Large 

Traders, 46 FR 59960, 59961 n.6 (Dec. 8, 1981) (“[I]n addition to market surveillance and enforcement of 

speculative limits, large trader data provides the basis for the Commission’s monthly report on commitments of 

large traders.”).

7 See, e.g., CFTC, “Commission Actions in Response to the Comprehensive Review of the Commitments of Traders 

Reporting Program,” at 6 (Dec. 5, 2006), available at 

https://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@commitmentsoftraders/documents/file/noticeonsupplementalcotrept.pdf; 

see also CFTC, Staff Report on Commodity Swap Dealers & Index Traders with Commission Recommendations, at 

46 (Sept. 2008), available at 

https://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@newsroom/documents/file/cftcstaffreportonswapdealers09.pdf (describing 

various market participants’ and researchers’ uses for the COT report).

8 The final rule promulgating regulation 17.00(g) was published in 1986. Final Rule, Reports Filed by Contract 

Markets, Futures Commission Merchants, Clearing Members, Foreign Brokers, and Large Traders, 51 FR 4712 

(Feb. 7, 1986).

9 17 CFR 17.00(g).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

5

delegate to the Director of the Office of Data and Technology the authority to specify the form, 

manner, coding structure, and electronic data transmission procedures for reporting these data 

elements under Part 17. These changes would both address shortcomings of the current format for 

Part 17 data and align Part 17 reporting with the reporting structure set out in Parts 16, 20, 39, 43, 

and 45.10

B. Statutory and Regulatory Framework for Regulation 17.00(a) Large Trader 

Reporting for Futures and Options

The reporting rules contained in Parts 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 21 of the Commission’s 

regulations are structured to ensure that the Commission receives adequate information to facilitate 

oversight of futures and options markets via its market surveillance programs.11 Part 16 requires 

contract markets to submit certain data; Parts 17 and 21 require FCMs, clearing members, foreign 

brokers, and certain reporting markets to submit certain data; and Parts 18 and 19 require individual 

traders to submit certain data.12 

The reporting rules are implemented by the Commission based on the authority of sections 

4a, 4c(b), 4g, and 4i of the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”). Section 4a of the CEA permits 

the Commission to set and approve exchange-set limits and enforce speculative position limits.13 

Section 4c(b) of the CEA gives the Commission plenary authority to regulate transactions that 

involve commodity options. 14 Section 4g of the CEA imposes reporting and recordkeeping 

obligations on registered entities, and requires each registered entity to file such reports as the 

 

10 See 17 CFR Part 16; 17 CFR Part 20; 17 CFR Part 39; 17 CFR Part 43; 17 CFR Part 45.

11 See, e.g., Final Rule, Reporting Levels and Recordkeeping, 69 FR 76392, 76392 (Dec. 21, 2004).

12 See 17 CFR Parts 16-19, 21.

13 7 U.S.C. 6a. Section 4a of the CEA also permits the Commission to set, approve, and enforce speculative position 

limits with respect to swaps.

14 7 U.S.C. 6c(b).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

6

Commission may require on proprietary and customer transactions and positions in commodities 

for future delivery executed on any board of trade.15 Additionally, Section 4g of the CEA requires 

registered entities to maintain daily trading records as required by the Commission and permits the 

Commission to require that such daily trading records be made available to the Commission.16 

Section 4i of the CEA requires the filing of such reports as the Commission may require when 

positions made or obtained on DCMs equal or exceed Commission-set levels.17

The Commission’s large trader reporting regime for futures and options requires reporting 

firms to submit, pursuant to regulation 17.00(a), daily reports to the Commission providing 

positions in open contracts 18 and identifying information for the futures and options trader

accounts that exceed Commission-set reporting levels—called special accounts19—and requires 

large traders themselves to provide certain identifying information.20 More specifically, regulation 

17.00(a) requires reporting firms to submit a regulation 17.00(a) large trader position report—

historically referred to as a “series ’01 report” 21—that itemizes by special account certain 

positions, deliveries of futures, and exchanges of futures for related positions associated with each 

account that carries a reportable position.22 Regulation 17.01 requires, separately, that reporting 

firms submit information, via Form 102A,

23 identifying the traders behind special accounts by 

 

15 7 U.S.C. 6g.

16 See id.

17 7 U.S.C. 6i.

18 “Open contract” means any commodity or commodity option position held by any person on or subject to the 

rules of a board of trade which have not expired, been exercised, or offset. See 17 CFR 1.3 and 17 CFR 15.00(n).

19 A “special account” means any commodity futures or options account in which there is a “reportable position.” 

17 CFR 15.00(r). A “reportable position” is any open contract position held or controlled by a trader at the close of 

business in any one futures contract of a commodity traded on any one contract market that equals or exceeds the 

reportable levels fixed by the Commission in regulation 15.03. 17 CFR 15.03.

20 17 CFR Part 18.

21 See, e.g., 17 CFR 15.02 (enumerating reports by “Form No.”).

22 17 CFR 17.00(a).

23 See 17 CFR Part 17, App’x A.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

7

name, address, and occupation, once an account accrues a reportable position.

24

 Reporting firms, 

as appropriate, submit Forms 102 to the Commission for each account when that account becomes 

reportable as a special account.25 By aggregating information from regulation 17.00(a) large trader

position reports and Forms 102, the Commission can determine the size of each reportable trader’s 

overall positions across special accounts held with multiple FCMs, clearing members, or foreign 

brokers.

These data reported under Part 17 are used for the Commission’s market surveillance 

program, for generating the weekly COT report, for market analysis, and for research projects.

26

 

Regulation 17.00(g) provides the data submission standard and data elements for the reportable 

positions by special accounts—regulation 17.00(a) large trader report data, or series ’01 report 

data—in the form of an 80-character record format.

27

The Commission receives regulation 17.00(a) large trader reports by 9 a.m. on the business 

day following the day to which the information pertains.28 Information obtained from such reports 

is ingested into the Commission’s Integrated Surveillance System (“ISS”), where it may be linked 

to ownership and control information for special accounts reported pursuant to regulation 17.01.29 

C. Shortcomings of the Regulation 17.00(g) Record Format 

 

24 17 CFR 17.01.

25 17 CFR 17.02(b).

26 See, e.g., Final Rule, Reports Filed by Contract Markets, Futures Commission Merchants, Clearing Members, 

Foreign Brokers, and Large Traders, 51 FR 4712, at 4712 (Feb. 7, 1986). 

27 17 CFR 17.00(g).

28 17 CFR 17.02(a).

29 ISS receives and stores end-of-day position reports submitted to the CFTC and allows the Commission’s divisions 

and offices to monitor daily activities of large traders. See, e.g., Final Rule, Ownership and Control Reports, Form

102/102S, 40/40S, and 71, 78 FR 69178, 69180 (Nov. 18, 2013). Among other things, ISS is used to generate the 

COT report.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

8

Regulation 17.00(g)’s 80-character record format has been in place since 1986,30 and has 

become outdated and difficult for staff to use. Historically, Part 17 has evolved alongside 

technological advances in data transmission. At the time of the Commission’s establishment, daily 

reports with respect to special accounts could be submitted to the Commission on paper series ’01 

forms.

31

 In 1984, the Commission amended Part 17 to permit, but not require, reporting firms to 

submit Part 17 reports on certain Commission-compatible data processing media—at that time, 

computer printouts or magnetic tape.32 The Commission found these methods improved data 

quality and saved time, money, and effort for both the Commission and market participants.33 In 

1986, the Commission revised Part 17 to specifically require that a reporting firm submit reports 

in a machine-readable form compatible with the Commission’s data processing system, unless 

otherwise authorized by the Commission.

34

 At that time, newly-established regulation 17.00(g) 

set out the data fields to be reported and introduced an 80-character submission standard based on 

Cobol Programming Language descriptions.

35

 Market participants were required to submit 

regulation 17.00(a) large trader position reports using “compatible data processing media, defined 

to include magnetic tape, magnetic diskette, or dial-up data transmission at speeds up to 1200 baud 

asynchronous transmission and 4800 baud synchronous transmission.”

36

 The Commission made 

 

30 See 51 FR 4712. 

31 See, e.g., Final Rule, Rules Under the Commodity Exchange Act, 41 FR 3192, 3208 (Jan. 21, 1976) (regulation 

17.03 permitted reporting of series 01 information on “compatible data-processing punched cards” in addition to 

magnetic tape or discs). The Commission’s predecessor agency received regulation 17.00(a) large trader reporting 

in a similar format. See, e.g., Supersedure of Certain Regulations, 26 FR 2968, 2969 (Apr. 7, 1961).

32 Final Rule, Reports Filed by Contract Markets, Futures Commission Merchants, Clearing Members, Foreign 

Brokers and Large Traders, 51 FR 4712-01, 4713-14 (Feb. 7, 1986). 

33 Id. at 4714; see also Proposed Rule, Reporting Requirements for Contract Markets, Futures Commission 

Merchants, Clearing Members and Traders, 50 FR 30450-01, 30452 (Jul. 26, 1985).

34 51 FR at 4714.

35 17 CFR 17.00(g) (1986). “Cobol” refers to Common Business Oriented Language.

36 17 C.F.R. 15.00(1) (1986); see also 51 FR at 4714. By 1995, the Commission received 95 percent of its futures 

large trader data through dial-up transmission or on machine-readable media. See Proposed Rule, Futures 

Commission Merchants, Clearing Members and Foreign Brokers; Option Large Trader Reports Daily Filing 

Requirements, 61 FR 37409-01, 37411 (Jul. 18, 1996).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

9

minor amendments to the particulars of the 80-character record format in 1997 and, in recognition 

of evolving data transmission methods, revised the definition of “compatible data-processing 

media” to delete its list of specific compatible media and delegate to staff the authority to define 

acceptable media.

37

 The 80-character record format has remained largely unchanged since 1997. 

In 2004, the Commission revised requirements that specified that reports be transmitted by “dialup” to allow for more general transmission via internet connection,

38 and expanded the 

requirement that reporting firms include information concerning volume attributable to exchanges 

of futures for physicals to include information concerning exchanges of futures for derivatives 

positions.39

Technology for financial reporting has further advanced since the 1990s. As a result, the 

record format for regulation 17.00(a) large trader reports has become outdated. 

First, the Cobol Language submission standard embedded in current regulation 17.00(g) is 

outdated. No other CFTC reporting regime relies in the same manner on a Cobol Language 

submission standard today.

40

 Outside of the Part 17 context, the Commission has transitioned to 

more modern data submission standards, such as Financial Products Markup Language 

(“FpML”), 41 the Financial Information eXchange (“FIX”) Protocol or Financial Information 

eXchange Markup Language (“FIXML”),

42 and other submission standards using extensible 

 

37 See Final Rule, Recordkeeping: Reports by Futures Commission Merchants, Clearing Members, Foreign Brokers, 

and Large Traders, 85 FR 24026, 24028 (May 2, 1997).

38 See Final Rule, Reporting Levels and Recordkeeping, 69 FR 76392-01, 76394 (Dec. 21, 2004).

39 See id. at 76394.

40 In 2004, the Commission removed a Cobol Language record format used for special calls under regulation 21.02 

as part of the process of modernizing the rules covering data and hard copy submissions to the Commission under 

Parts 15 through 21. See id. at 76400 (removing regulation 21.02).

41 FpML is a freely-licensed business information exchange standard for derivatives. See FpML, “What is 

FpML®?,” available at https://www.fpml.org/about/what-is-fpml/ (last visited April 26, 2023).

42 See FIX Trading, “What is FIX?,” available at https://www.fixtrading.org/what-is-fix/ (last visited April 26, 

2023).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

10

markup language (“XML”).

43

 XML standards have the ability to capture complex or customizable 

information about products44 beyond the capabilities of the simpler Cobol Language used in the 

current regulation 17.00(g) standard. The Commission converted reporting for transaction data 

reporting by DCMs to an FIXML standard in the 2009 to 2010 period.45 XML-based standards 

like FpML and FIXML both have been widely used by market participants and regulators to 

represent financial data for purposes of electronically messaging and confirming derivatives trades 

since at least 2011.46 

Second, the current regulation 17.00(g) record format has grown error-prone. Correcting 

errors in regulation 17.00(a) data is burdensome for both Commission staff and industry. 

Uncorrected errors in such data impair the Commission’s ability to utilize data for surveillance 

and market analysis. In addition to relying on data reported under regulation 17.00(a) for market 

surveillance, the Commission generates the weekly COT report based on such data.47 Because the 

current regulation 17.00(g) record format does not support automated data quality checks from the 

Commission back to reporting firms, Commission staff must manually contact reporting firms to 

address errors, which has proven time-consuming and inefficient. Reporting firms must, in turn, 

submit error corrections. This error correction process puts the timeliness of the COT report in 

jeopardy. The error correction process also imposes costs on the Commission and on industry that 

 

43 See, e.g., Large Trader Reporting for Physical Commodity Swaps: Division of Market Oversight Guidebook for 

Part 20 Reports (June 22, 2015), available at 

https://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@newsroom/documents/file/ltrguidebook062215.pdf (incorporating FpML 

and FIXML data standards for Part 20 reporting); CFTC Technical Specification, Parts 43 and 45 swap data 

reporting and public dissemination requirements, Version 3.0 (Sept. 30, 2021), available at

https://www.cftc.gov/media/6576/Part43_45TechnicalSpecification093021CLEAN/download (incorporating 

FIXML data standard for Parts 43 and 45 reporting).

44 See id.

45 See Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Account Ownership and Control Information, 74 FR 31642, 

31644 (July 2, 2009). 

46 See CFTC and SEC, “Joint Study on the Feasibility of Mandating Algorithmic Descriptions for Derivatives,” at 11 

(Apr. 7, 2011), available at

https://www.cftc.gov/sites/default/files/idc/groups/public/@swaps/documents/file/dfstudy_algo_040711.pdf.

47 See, e.g., 46 FR at 59961 n.6.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

11

could be reduced or avoided if the Commission were able to implement automated data quality 

checks. 

Third, data received in the regulation 17.00(g) record format is difficult to query outside of 

ISS, limiting staff’s flexibility in working with this data and impeding staff’s ability to integrate 

this data with other data housed outside of ISS. 

Fourth, new contract features have been introduced to the market since the last revisions to 

regulation 17.00(g), including certain features which are in some cases not readily susceptible to 

representation in regulation 17.00(g)’s current 80-character record format. For example, the 

current regulation 17.00(g) submission standard contains a single data field that allows the 

reporting firm to indicate the strike for an option position, but cannot accommodate reporting

strikes for a bounded option position—a position in a contract that has both an upper and lower 

strike—in that single data field. To accommodate data reporting for such contracts, the 

Commission must undertake additional manual work, including ingesting supplemental data 

reports. This is time-consuming, inefficient, and introduces unnecessary risks of error.

In light of the above, the Commission is proposing to amend Part 17 to (1) remove the 

outdated 80-character record format and replace it with provisions that delegate to staff the 

authority to designate a modern data submission standard, and (2) replace the data fields

represented in the 80-character record format with an appendix of applicable data elements and a 

Part 17 Guidebook to provide the form and manner for submitting data reports. In introducing an 

appendix of applicable data elements, the Commission also proposes to add data elements 

necessary to represent positions in certain innovative contracts in regulation 17.00(a) reports and 

to indicate the types of transactions that resulted in day-to-day changes in positions as described 

below.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

12

II. Proposed Rules

 A. § 17.00(g), § 17.00(h), and § 17.03(d)—Submission Standard

As discussed above, the current regulation 17.00(g) record format has become outdated, 

error-prone, and difficult to use. The Commission is proposing amendments to remove regulation 

17.00(g)’s current, outdated 80-character record format and to replace it with provisions that allow 

the Commission to implement modern data submission standards.48 Specifically, the Commission 

proposes to remove current regulation 17.00(g)’s 80-character record format and amend regulation 

17.03(d) to delegate authority to the Director of the Office of Data and Technology to designate a 

submission standard for reports required under regulation 17.00(a). That submission standard 

would be published in a Part 17 Guidebook. The Commission proposes replacing current 

regulation 17.00(g) with a provision requiring that a report under regulation 17.00(a) include all 

applicable data elements specified in a proposed Appendix C to Part 17, and be submitted in the 

form and manner provided in the Part 17 Guidebook. Delegated authority would facilitate 

implementing a submission standard that accommodates technological advances and provides 

efficiencies to market participants required to submit reports required by regulation 17.00(a).

1. Removal of the Regulation 17.00(g) Record Format and Delegation of 

Authority to the Office of Data and Technology to Require Modern 

Submission Standards

As discussed above, the current regulation 17.00(g) record format has become outdated. 

The Cobol Language submission standard is used nowhere else in CFTC reporting, as the 

Commission has otherwise transitioned to more modern data submission standards for data 

 

48 17 CFR 17.00(g).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

13

reporting across its reporting regulations.49 That record format is also error-prone and difficult to 

query outside of ISS, rendering large trader position data difficult to integrate with other 

Commission data. And, that submission standard lacks the flexibility to accommodate certain 

features of innovative contracts.

To replace the current regulation 17.00(g) record format, the Commission proposes to 

revise regulations 17.00(g) and 17.03(d) to explicitly delegate authority to the Director of the 

Office of Data and Technology to determine the form and manner for reporting data required to 

be reported under regulation 17.00(a), including to establish the data submission standard for such 

reports. Concurrently with the issuance of this notice, the Office of Data and Technology has 

published a proposed Part 17 Guidebook on the Commission’s website, https://www.cftc.gov. The 

proposed Part 17 Guidebook will specify the data submission standard for reports required under 

regulation 17.00(a), among other things. Such an approach is consistent with the Commission’s 

practice in other data reporting regimes.50 To facilitate adaptation to modern data standards, the 

Commission has delegated authority to the Divisions to determine which data standards to permit 

or require in order to accommodate the needs of different communities of users.51 The Divisions 

 

49 See, e.g., See Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Account Ownership and Control Information, 74 FR 

31642, 31644 (July 2, 2009) (regulation 16.02 data to be reported in FIXML); Large Trader Reporting for Physical 

Commodity Swaps: Division of Market Oversight Guidebook for Part 20 Reports (June 22, 2015), available at 

https://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@newsroom/documents/file/ltrguidebook062215.pdf (incorporating FpML 

and FIXML data standards for Part 20 reporting); CFTC Technical Specification, Parts 43 and 45 swap data 

reporting and public dissemination requirements, Version 3.0 (Sept. 30, 2021), available at

https://www.cftc.gov/media/6576/Part43_45TechnicalSpecification093021CLEAN/download (incorporating 

FIXML data standard for Parts 43 and 45 reporting).

50 See, e.g., 17 CFR 45.15(a)(2) (delegating authority to staff to determine whether to require reporting swap data 

using “one or more particular data standards (such as FIX, FpML, ISO 20022, or some other standard), to 

accommodate the needs of different communities of users”); 17 CFR 20.8(d) (delegating authority to staff to provide 

“instructions or determin[e] the format, coding structure, and electronic data transmission procedures for submitting 

data records and any other information” required for large trader swaps reporting under Part 20).

51 See, e.g., 17 CFR 20.8; 17 CFR 45.11; 17 CFR 45.15(a)(2).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

14

exercise delegated authority through the publication of guidebooks or technical specifications that 

set out the form, manner, and timing for reporting data.

The proposed Part 17 Guidebook specifies that reporting firms submit regulation 17.00(a) 

data in FIXML format. In its other reporting regimes, the Commission typically requires modern 

XML submission standards, such as FpML52 or FIXML.53 Receiving Part 17 data in a modern 

submission format comparable to that used in the submission of other datasets the Commission 

relies on would enable staff to more easily analyze Part 17 data outside of ISS and to more easily 

integrate Part 17 data with other Commission datasets. Notably, the Commission receives Trade 

Capture Reports and Ownership and Control Reports in a FIXML format.54 Regulation 17.00(a) 

position data can be linked to regulation 16.02 transaction data through ownership and control data 

required to be reported under regulation 17.01.55 Receiving regulation 17.00(a) position data via 

FIXML and storing the same in ISS would facilitate linking ISS data to Trade Capture Report data 

stored in the Commission’s Trade Surveillance System (“TSS”). Adopting an XML-based 

 

52 See, e.g., Large Trader Reporting for Physical Commodity Swaps: Division of Market Oversight Guidebook for 

Part 20 Reports (June 22, 2015), available at

https://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@newsroom/documents/file/ltrguidebook062215.pdf (permitting submission 

using FpML). 

53 See, e.g., id. (permitting submission of Part 20 reports using FIXML); see also See Advanced Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, Account Ownership and Control Information, 74 FR 31642, 31644 (July 2, 2009) (FIXML is used for 

reporting transaction data for futures and options reporting under regulation 16.02). FIXML is an XML standard 

using the Financial Information eXchange Protocol (“FIX”); see also Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Account 

Ownership and Control Report, 75 FR, 41775, 41784 (July 19, 2010) (“Reporting entities should submit the 

[ownership and control reports required under regulation 17.01] weekly, in FIXML . . .”); see also Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking, Reporting and Information Requirements for Derivatives Clearing Organizations, 87 FR 

76698, 76704 (Dec. 15, 2022) (addressing use of FIXML standard for daily reporting required of derivatives 

clearing organizations). 

54 See Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Account Ownership and Control Information, 74 FR 31642, 

31644 (July 2, 2009) (FIXML scheduled to be implemented for Trade Capture Reports in 2009); Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, Account Ownership and Control Report, 75 FR, 41775, 41784 (July 19, 2010) (“Reporting entities 

should submit the [ownership and control reports required under regulation 17.01] weekly, in FIXML . . .”).

55 17 CFR 17.01. Trade Capture Reports contain trade and related order book data at the transaction level organized 

by trading account numbers, but do not generally contain biographical information for the owners of those trading 

accounts. See Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Account Ownership and Control Information, 74 FR 

31642, 31644 (July 2, 2009). Such biographical information is provided separately through Ownership and Control 

Reports, which are submitted for special accounts identified under Part 17. See id.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

15

standard for large trader position reports required under regulation 17.00(a) should also improve 

data quality by reducing the rate of errors. 

The Commission has previously recognized the importance of flexibility with respect to 

promulgating reporting submission standards to accommodate technological advances. For 

example, for Part 17 reporting, the Commission previously revised the definition of “compatible 

data-processing media” to remove enumeration of specific media in part because it was impractical 

to define the term by regulation since electronic media were evolving at such a rapid pace.56 

Elsewhere, for swaps large trader reporting under Part 20, the Commission delegated to staff the 

authority to provide instructions for and determine the format, coding structure, and electronic data 

transmission procedures for submitting data records in order to allow the Commission to respond 

to changing market and technological conditions for the purpose of ensuring timely and accurate 

data reporting.57 Such an approach allows the Commission to consult with market participants and 

update reporting submission standards to remain consistent with industry best practices.58

Amending regulations 17.00(g) and 17.03(d) to facilitate implementation of a modern data 

submission standard should also simplify reporting for reporting firms. Although updating 

submission standards will require technological changes for reporting firms, the Commission 

believes that eliminating the use of the unique regulation 17.00(g) record format and replacing it 

with a more commonly-used submission standard may result in more efficient reporting. 

Additionally, using a modern submission standard should facilitate automated data quality checks 

from the Commission back to reporting firms, which should reduce burdens associated with 

 

56 62 FR at 24028; 17 CFR 15.00(d) (defining “compatible data processing media” as “data processing media 

approved by the Commission or its designee”).

57 Final Rule, Large Trader Reporting for Physical Commodity Swaps, 76 FR 43851, 43857 (Jul. 22, 2011).

58 See, e.g., 76 FR at 43857 n.20 (explaining that “the Commission anticipates consulting with clearing organizations 

and reporting entities before determining the format, coding structure, and electronic data transmission procedures” 

for Part 20 reports).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

16

correcting data errors and the time necessary to complete the correction process. A more efficient 

error correction process will also, in turn, assist staff in timely generating the weekly COT report.

The Commission invites comments on all aspects of the proposed Part 17 Guidebook in 

addition to comments on this notice of proposed rulemaking.

2. Secure FTP Feed Versus Portal Submission

The Commission recognizes that reporting firms’ technological capabilities may vary 

based on relative size and experience of a given reporting firm. For example, the Commission 

understands that today, although some firms have automated the process for creating reports 

required by regulation 17.00(a), other firms manually create those reports. Accordingly, the 

proposed Part 17 Guidebook offers two submission methods for regulation 17.00(a) data: (a) an 

XML-based, secure file transfer protocol (“FTP”) data feed, and (b) a web-based portal to ingest 

manual submissions. The Commission anticipates that such an approach will provide greater 

flexibility to reporting firms. Reporting firms may consider their existing data reporting 

infrastructure and the volume of reports they expect to submit, among other factors, when selecting 

their preferred submission method. The proposed Part 17 Guidebook provides detailed 

instructions for submitting under each method.

3. Delegation of Authority to Determine the Form and Manner for Error 

Corrections

Current Regulation 17.00(h) provides that, unless otherwise approved by the Commission 

or its designee, corrections of errors and omissions in data required to be reported under regulation 

17.00(a) shall be filed “on series ’01 forms or in the format, coding structure and data transmission 

procedures approved in writing by the Commission or its designee.” 59 Consistent with the 

 

59 17 CFR 17.00(h).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

17

Commission’s proposal to revise Part 17 to modernize the reporting of data under regulation 

17.00(a), the Commission proposes updating the submission standard for error corrections to 

mirror the submission standard for the data to be corrected.

Today, reporting firmssubmit error corrections using the current regulation 17.00(g) record 

format.60 Upon receipt of a correction, staff replaces the original, erroneous record with the 

corrected record. Staff will employ a similar process to ingest error corrections following the 

proposed removal of the current regulation 17.00(g) record format, such that corrected and omitted 

data will be submitted using the new data submission standard published by the Office of Data and 

Technology in the proposed Part 17 Guidebook pursuant to delegated authority.61

Currently, staff manually notifies reporting firms when it identifies errors in regulation 

17.00(a) reports submitted by those firms. Following implementation of this proposal, the 

Commission expects to automate this process to notify reporting firms of errors on the same day 

erroneous reports are submitted. The Commission expects automating this process will facilitate 

more rapid corrections to reported data, which will improve the quality of the data used by 

Commission staff.

Request for Comment

The Commission requests comments on all aspects of the proposed changes to regulations 

in Part 17, including proposed changes to regulations 17.00(a), 17.00(g) and 17.03(d). The 

Commission requests specific comment on the following:

 

60 Reports that correct errors or omissions populate the “Record Type” data field with a character that identifies that 

the submitted record corrects an error or omission and provides further information about that correction. See 17 

CFR 17.00(g)(2)(xiv).

61 As discussed below, the Commission proposes to retain the current “Record type” data field as a data element that 

will serve to identify reports that correct errors or omissions. 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

18

(1) The advantages and disadvantages of the proposed Part 17 Guidebook requiring a 

FIXML submission standard for reports required under regulation 17.00(a), including with respect 

to data quality, implementation costs, and ongoing costs post-implementation.

(2) The proposal to permit reporting firms to submit regulation 17.00(a) large trader

position reports through the Commission’s web-based portal as an alternative to submission by 

secure FTP.

(3) The advantages and disadvantages of correcting errors in data required to be reported 

under regulation 17.00(a) in the manner provided in the proposed Part 17 Guidebook, including 

with respect to data quality, implementation costs, and ongoing costs post-implementation.

 B. Appendix C to Part 17 and § 17.03(d)—Data Elements

1. Appendix C

As discussed above, in order to facilitate implementation of a modern submission standard, 

the Commission proposes removing the record format set out in regulation 17.00(g). Removing 

that record format will remove the data fields as well. To replace the data fields proposed to be

deleted from regulation 17.00(g), the Commission proposes to add an Appendix C to Part 17 

specifying required data elements and defining those elements. Enumerating required data 

elements in an appendix is consistent with the approach taken for certain other Commission data 

reporting regulations.62 In addition to retaining the data currently required to be reported under 

regulation 17.00(a), proposed Appendix C would provide revised definitions and add certain data 

elements not currently required by the regulation 17.00(g) record format.

The Commission is proposing to remove the definitions set out in current regulation 

17.00(g)(2). The Commission is proposing to include related definitions in Appendix C, revised 

 

62 See, e.g., 17 CFR Part 20 App’x B; 17 CFR Part 43 App’x A; 17 CFR Part 45 App’x 1.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

19

to remove language providing the form and manner for reporting data. Given that the current 

17.00(g) record format will be removed from the rule and updated guidance on the form and 

manner for reporting will be required, certain of the regulation 17.00(g)(2) definitions contain 

language that would become superfluous. For example, for the “Report Type” data element, the 

Commission is proposing not to include in Appendix C the portion of the definition that specifies 

that “[v]alid values” to submit include “RP” for reporting positions, “DN” for reporting notices, 

and “EP” for reporting exchanges of futures for a commodity or for a derivatives position.63

Rather than specifying the form and manner for reporting the regulation 17.00(a) data 

elements in the rule, the Commission is proposing to delegate authority to determine the form and 

manner for reporting each data element to the Director of the Office of Data and Technology. To 

implement this delegation of authority, the Commission is proposing to amend regulation 17.03(d) 

to provide that the Director of the Office of Data and Technology would specify the form, manner, 

coding structure, and electronic data transmission procedures for reports and submissions under 

regulation 17.00(a). The proposed Part 17 Guidebook would set forth the form, manner, coding 

structure, and electronic data transmission procedures for reporting the data elements in proposed 

Appendix C to Part 17, and to determine whether to permit or require one or more particular data 

standards.

Providing form and manner requirements through a Part 17 Guidebook would bring the 

Part 17 framework in line with reporting under Parts 16, 20, 43, and 45, for which, rather than 

embedding technical reporting details into regulation text, the Commission has delegated authority 

to staff to set the form and manner for reporting outside of the regulation text through a published 

 

63 17 CFR 17.00(g)(2)(i).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

20

technical specification or guidebook.64 Implementing form and manner requirements through a 

Part 17 Guidebook will facilitate the Commission’s ability to respond to changing market 

conventions and technological conditions, to harmonize submission standards with those of other 

authorities,

65 and to accommodate the introduction of innovative products.

As discussed above, concurrently with the issuance of this notice, the Commission has 

published a proposed Part 17 Guidebook on its website, https://www.cftc.gov. Commenters are 

invited to comment on both the data submission standard in the proposed Part 17 Guidebook and 

on the data elements in proposed Appendix C.

Request for Comment

The Commission requests comments on all aspects of the proposed Part 17 Guidebook 

published at the time of publication of this notice of proposed rulemaking.

2. Data Elements in Appendix C

Proposed Appendix C will maintain certain data elements included in the current regulation 

17.00(g) record format, revise certain data elements included in the current regulation 17.00(g) 

record format, and add certain data elements not previously included in the regulation 17.00(g) 

record format. The proposed additional data elements capture information not captured by the 

 

64 See, e.g., 17 C.F.R. 16.07(c), (d) (delegating authority to staff to “approve the format, coding structure and 

electronic data transmission procedures used by reporting markets” and “to determine the specific content of any 

daily trade and supporting data report”); 17 C.F.R. 20.2(d) (delegating authority to staff “for providing instructions 

or determining the format, coding structure, and electronic data transmission procedures for submitting data records 

and any other information required under this part”); 17 C.F.R. 43.7(a) (delegating authority to staff “[t]o publish the 

technical specification providing the form and manner for reporting and publicly disseminating the swap transaction 

and pricing data elements in appendix A of [Part 43]”); 17 C.F.R. 45.15(b)(1) (delegating authority to staff “to 

publish the technical specifications providing the form and manner for reporting the swap data elements in appendix 

1 to [Part 45] to swap data repositories”).

65 Final Rule, Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements, 85 FR 75503, 75535 (Nov. 25, 2020) (“The 

Commission . . . believes delegation to DMO will benefit data element harmonization.”); see also Final Rule, Large 

Trader Reporting for Physical Commodity Swaps, 76 FR 43851, 43857 (Jul. 22, 2011) (the purpose of delegating 

authority to staff to provide “instructions for determining the format, coding structure, and electronic data 

transmission procedures for submitting data records and any other information required under [Part 20] . . . is to 

facilitate the ability of the Commission to respond to changing market and technological conditions for the purpose 

of ensuring timely and accurate data reporting”).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

21

current regulation 17.00(g) record format that is necessary to fulfill the Commission’s surveillance 

and market analysis missions. The form and manner for reporting each of these data elements 

would be set forth in the proposed Part 17 Guidebook. The Commission invites comment on any 

of the data elements proposed in Appendix C. This section discusses these data elements below 

by category. 

First, proposed Appendix C includes data elements currently captured by the fields in the 

current regulation 17.00(g) record format. In some instances, those data elements are revised to 

account for the introduction of a modern data submission standard. Second, proposed Appendix 

C includes data elements necessary to facilitate a modern, XML-based data submission standard, 

including data elements used to manage ingestion of data, such as “Total Message Count” and 

“Message Type.” Third, proposed Appendix C would add data elements necessary to capture 

product-identifying information not captured by the current record format, such as “Ticker 

Symbol” as well as certain data elements necessary to capture information to represent innovative 

contracts such as “bounded contracts,” options expiring to baskets of futures, and other novel 

contracts. The current record format does not allow reporting firms to represent all economically 

material terms of such contracts, and as a result the Commission is in some instances unable to 

determine whether certain special accounts carry positions in the same or different products. 

Fourth, proposed Appendix C would add data elements necessary to capture accurate information 

concerning changes in positions of special accounts that is not available in current regulation 

17.00(a) large trader reporting but would benefit the Commission’s surveillance programs and 

market analysis. 

a. Category 1: Currently Reported Data Elements
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

22

Proposed Appendix C retains data elements capturing certain of the information currently 

captured by regulation 17.00(g)’s 80-character record format.66 The 80-character record format 

captures certain information necessary to process data,

67 information concerning the reporting firm 

and special account,68 product-identifying information,69 and information concerning the direction 

or nature of the trades underlying the position.

70

Proposed Appendix C calls for certain of this information in a different format than 

currently provided. For example, whereas the current regulation 17.00(g) record format captures 

information concerning whether a position is long or short in a single field, proposed Appendix C 

would capture long and short positions using separate data elements (“Long Position” and “Short 

Position”). Similarly, whereas the current regulation 17.00(g) record format identifies exchanges 

of futures for related positions using a single “Report type” field, proposed Appendix C would 

capture information concerning such exchanges in greater granularity through several data 

elements. As discussed further below, this greater granularity will facilitate Commission market 

surveillance and analysis programs.

b. Category 2: XML Implementation and Data Processing

 

66 These fields would include (1) Data Element #7 Record Type (Action), (2) Data Element #8 Report Date, (3) Data 

Element #9 (Reporting Firm ID), (4) Data Element #11 Account ID, (5) Data Element #12 Exchange Indicator, (6) 

Data Element #13 Commodity Clearing Code, (7) Data Element #16 Maturity Month Year, (8) Data Element #20 

Strike Level, (9) Data Element #26 Put or Call Indicator, (10) Data Element #27 Exercise Style, (11) Data Element 

#30 Underlying Contract ID, (12) Data Element #31 Underlying Maturity Month Year, (13) Data Element #32 Long 

Position, (14) Data Element #33 Short Position, (15) Data Element #38 Delivery Notices Stopped, and (16) Data 

Element #39 Delivery Notices Issued.

67 For example, “Report Date,” and “Record Type.” 17 CFR 17.00(g)(1).

68 For example, “Reporting Firm” and “Account Number.” 17 CFR 17.00(g)(1).

69 For example, “Commodity Code,” “Expiration Date,” and “Exchange Code.”

70 For example, “Report type,” “Put or Call,” “Strike Price,” “Exercise Style,” “Long – Buy – Stopped,” and “Short 

– Sell – Issued.”
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

23

Proposed Appendix C calls for certain data elements to facilitate processing of data.71 Such 

data elements generally do not correspond to analogous data elements in regulation 17.00(g)’s 

record format. These include data elements concerning the submission of messages to the 

Commission, data elements identifying the sender and special account controller, and data 

elements identifying the date and time of the report. This information is necessary to enable the 

Commission to track and manage reports received using an XML submission standard.

The “Special Account Controller LEI” data element captures the legal entity identifier 

(“LEI”) of the account controller. An LEI is a unique code assigned to an entity in accordance 

with the standards set by the Global Legal Identifier System.72 The “Special Account Controller 

LEI” data element would allow the Commission to link data reports submitted under regulation 

17.00(a) with other data reports concerning the same counterparty. The Commission notes that 

not all special account controllers possess a legal entity identifier, or “LEI.” Some special account 

controllers may be ineligible to receive an LEI. For example, it is highly likely that a natural 

person who controls a special account would be unable to obtain an LEI. 73 For clarity, the 

Commission expects the “Special Account Controller LEI” data element will be conditional—an 

LEI must be reported for special accounts for which the special account controller is eligible to 

receive an LEI, but an LEI need not be reported for special accounts for which the special account 

controller is ineligible for an LEI. For such accounts, the Commission will receive identifying 

information via Form 102A.

 

71 These fields would include (1) Data Element #1 Total Message Count, (2) Data Element #2 Message Type, (3) 

Data Element #3 Sender ID, (4) Data Element #4 To ID, (5) Data Element #5 Message Transmit Datetime, (6) Data 

Element #6 Report ID, and (7) Data Element #10 Special Account Controller LEI.

72 The Global Legal Identifier System was established by the finance ministers and the central bank governors of the 

Group of Twenty nations and the Financial Stability Board. See Charter of the Regulatory Oversight 

Committee For the Global Legal Entity Identifier System, available at https://www.leiroc.org/

publications/gls/roc_20190130-1.pdf.

73 The Commission has elsewhere discussed this issue in regulations concerning reporting of swap data. See, e.g., 

Final Rule, Swap Data Reporting and Recordkeeping, 85 FR 75503, 75520 (Nov. 25, 2020).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

24

c. Category 3: Product Identification

Proposed Appendix C calls for reporting of certain data elements that, where applicable, 

are necessary to identify and distinguish the futures or option contract pertaining to the reported 

position. Specifically, additional data elements are necessary to draw more granular distinctions 

between certain contracts for reportable positions,74 to accommodate reporting of positions in

bounded or barrier contracts,75 to accommodate reporting of positions in contracts with non-price 

or non-numeric strikes, 76 and to accommodate reporting of positions in other innovative 

contracts.77

Distinguishing Products. Certain additional fields are necessary to precisely identify the 

product for a reported position. When regulation 17.00(g) was promulgated and revised in the 

1980s and 1990s, exchanges listed a less diverse array of futures and options contracts than those 

available today. More granular data is required to distinguish among products in today’s futures 

and options markets. Regulation 17.00(g)’s current record format allows the Commission to 

identify the product for a given position based on a combination of data points that indicate whether 

the product is a futures or option contract and identify the underlying commodity. That record 

format, however, is limited. For example, that record format allows the Commission to identify 

the underlying commodity through a “Commodity Code” field, which is populated with an 

exchange-assigned code corresponding to a relevant underlier. 78 However, the “Commodity 

 

74 These fields would include (1) Data Element #14 Product Type, (2) Data Element #15 Ticker Symbol, (3) Data 

Element #17 Maturity Time, (4) Data Element #18 Listing Date, and (5) Data Element #19 Earliest Exercise Date.

75 These fields would include (1) Data Element #22 Cap Level, (2) Data Element #23 Floor Level, (3) Data Element 

#24 Bound or Barrier Type, (4) Data Element #25 Bound or Barrier Level, (5) Data Element #28 Payout Amount, 

and (6) Data Element #29 Payout Type.

76 These fields would include Data Element #21 Alpha Strike, as well as transposing the “Strike Price” field in the 

current regulation 17.00(g) record format to Data Element #20, “Strike Level,” in proposed Appendix C.

77 For example, Data Element #50 Product-Specific Terms.

78 17 CFR 17.00(g)(2)(vii) (the “Commodity” field reflects “[a]n exchange-assigned commodity code for the futures 

and options contract”).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

25

Code” field does not currently enable the Commission to draw more granular distinctions between 

products that reference the same commodity but have material differences. A proposed “Product 

Type” field would allow the Commission to differentiate between futures and options contracts 

that use the same “Commodity Code” without separately relying on other reported fields, which 

may be insufficient to adequately distinguish between products in some instances.

79

 A proposed

“Ticker Symbol” field would provide the Commission with the published ticker symbol associated 

with the product on the listing contract market. 80 Proposed Appendix C would provide for 

“Maturity Month Year” and “Underlying Maturity Month Year” data elements, where applicable, 

to be populated with a specific day when necessary to characterize a product.81 Similarly, a 

“Maturity Time” data element, where applicable, would be populated with the expiration time of 

an option or last trading time of a future for contracts that have multiple expiration times within a 

single day. A “Listing Date” data element, where applicable, would be populated with the listing 

date for options that had early expirations and were relisted with identical strikes and expirations, 

allowing the Commission to distinguish between tranches of closely related contracts. Absent 

such a field, different tranches of certain options contracts might be indistinguishable in ISS.82 An 

“Earliest Exercise Date” data element would provide, where applicable, the date when American 

 

79 The Commission proposes to retain the “Commodity Code” field, but to rename it to “Commodity Clearing 

Code,” which more accurately reflects industry terminology and provides consistency in labeling between reports 

provided under Part 17 and Part 16.

80 Ticker symbols typically include a product code consisting of a multi-letter code assigned to the underlier, a 

month code consisting of a single alphabetical character assigned to a month or quarter, and a year code consisting 

of a numerical code representing a particular year.

81 This responds to the advent of certain futures and options contracts with more varied maturity or expiration dates.

82 If a DCM lists an option that settles based on the occurrence of a specified event—as opposed to expiring at a 

future time that is certain at the time the contract is executed—and that specified event may occur serially at 

multiple times, a “Listing Date” data element would permit the Commission to distinguish between iterations of that 

contract as it is re-listed following expirations.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

26

or Bermuda options83 may be exercised, which would assist the Commission in identifying more 

complex positions.

Bounded or Barrier Contracts. Certain of these data elements are necessary to accurately 

report “bounded”84 or “barrier”85 contracts, including “Cap Level,” “Floor Level,” and “Bound or 

Barrier Level,” as the current regulation 17.00(g) record format does not accommodate this 

information. A “Bound or Barrier Type” data element would be necessary to identify the behavior 

of a product when it hits a bound or barrier, including to distinguish between “knock-in,” “knockout,” and capped products.86

 Receiving data sufficient to understand the economics of bounded 

and barrier contracts would, among other things, support the Commission’s surveillance program. 

Position data that more completely reflects the economics of positions in bounded or barrier 

options would provide the Commission with greater insight into, for example, potential crossmarket manipulation. Where a bounded or barrier contract references the price or value of a 

contract or commodity listed in another market, a manipulative trader may trade in that other 

market for the purpose of influencing the price or value of that contract in order to hit or avoid a 

bound or barrier for an options position held in the first market. 

 

83 An American Option is an option that can be exercised at any time prior to or on the expiration date. See CFTC, 

Futures Glossary, available at

https://www.cftc.gov/LearnAndProtect/AdvisoriesAndArticles/CFTCGlossary/index.htm (last visited April 26, 

2023). A Bermuda Option is an option which can be exercised on a specified set of predetermined dates during the 

life of the option. See id. In contrast, a European Option is an option that may only be exercised on the expiration 

date. See id.

84 A bounded futures contract specifies upper and lower boundaries, which limit short and long interest exposure. 

See, e.g., Eris Exchange, LLC, “CFTC Regulation 40.2(a) Certification. Notification Regarding the Initial Listing of 

Eris Exchange Financially Settled Bounded Futures Contract on Bitcoin and Ether” (Aug. 21, 2020), available at

https://www.cftc.gov/sites/default/files/filings/ptc/20/08/ptc082420erisdcmdcm001.pdf.

85 A barrier option contract specifies a “barrier,” either a price or an event, the occurrence of which triggers either a 

knock-in or knock-out provision. 

86 A knock-in is a provision in an option or other derivative contract whereby the contract is activated only if the 

price of the underlying instrument reaches a specified level before a specified expiration date. A knock-out is a 

provision in an option whereby the contract is immediately canceled if the price of the underlying instrument 

reaches a specified level during the life of the contract. See CFTC, Futures Glossary, available at

https://www.cftc.gov/LearnAndProtect/AdvisoriesAndArticles/CFTCGlossary/index.htm (last visited April 26, 

2023).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

27

To obtain comprehensive data concerning positions in bounded and barrier contract and 

certain binary option contracts based on the occurrence or non-occurrence of a specified event, 

proposed Appendix C also includes “Payout Amount” and “Payout Type” data elements. The 

proposed “Payout Amount” data element is intended to capture a cash amount of the payout 

associated with a product where that amount may not otherwise be determined based on reported 

data. The proposed “Payout Type” data element would allow the Commission to distinguish 

between vanilla, capped, binary, and other options that use the same Commodity Clearing Code.

Non-Price and Non-Numeric Strike Levels. Certain of the data elements in Proposed 

Appendix C are necessary to accurately capture information for options contracts that contain nonprice and non-numeric strike levels. Specifically, regulation 17.00(g)’s record format’s “Strike 

Price” field would be converted to two separate data elements: “Strike Level” and “Alpha Strike.” 

These data elements, respectively, would accommodate reporting of certain listed options contracts 

with non-monetary threshold levels and non-numeric threshold levels. For example, a binary 

option with U.S. Gross Domestic Product (“GDP”) as an underlier would have a non-price strike—

a GDP figure. Other contracts that incorporate the occurrence or non-occurrence of a specified 

event as an underlier might specify as strikes non-numeric units, which would more appropriately 

be reported as a strike “value,” or “Alpha Strike.” For example, a binary option with different 

categories of hurricane landfalls as strike values might include as “Alpha Strikes” different 

categories of hurricane—for example, “Category 1 or higher” or “Category 2 or higher.”

Product-Specific Terms. To account for the likelihood that exchanges will introduce 

contracts that include novel features, proposed Appendix C includes a “Product-Specific Terms” 

data element. For innovative contracts, this data element would be populated with data reflecting

economically material terms of contracts are not otherwise able to be represented in the proposed 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

28

Appendix C data elements. The data element would not require reporting of any information that 

is not already separately recorded by a DCM for recordkeeping purposes. Future editions of the

proposed Part 17 Guidebook would specify the form and manner of reporting positions in products 

subject to reporting that includes the “Product-Specific Terms” data element. 

Reporting under this data element—as well as certain other data elements designed to 

represent particular products, such as the aforementioned fields designed to capture terms of 

bounded and barrier contracts—would only be required to be reported for contracts that cannot 

otherwise be represented in Part 17 reporting. Put differently, for reporting firms that facilitate 

trading or clearing of contracts that can be adequately represented in the other data elements in the 

proposed Part 17 Guidebook, reporting data pursuant to the “Product-Specific Terms” data element 

would not be required. Reporting firms that do become involved in trading futures and options 

contracts for which economically material terms are not otherwise reportable under regulation 

17.00(a) may be required to report such data. Pursuant to the proposed rule, the Director of the 

Office of Data and Technology would have delegated authority to publish the form and manner of 

any product-specific terms required to be reported pursuant to this proposed data element.

d. Category 4: Information Concerning Changes in Positions

Proposed Appendix C would add data elements necessary to capture accurate information 

regarding changes in positions that is not fully-captured by the current regulation 17.00(g) record 

format. 87 Understanding the nature and quantity of transactions that resulted in day-to-day 

 

87 These fields would include (1) Data Element #34 Contracts Bought, (2) Data Element #35 Contracts Sold, (3) 

Data Element #36 EDRPs Bought, (4) Data Element #37 EDRPs Sold, (5) Data Element #38 Delivery Notices 

Stopped, (6) Data Element #39 Delivery Notices Issued, (7) Data Element #40 Long Options Expired, (8) Data 

Element #41 Short Options Expired, (9) Data Element #42 Long Options Exercised, (10) Data Element #43 Short 

Options Exercised, (11) Data Element #44 Long Futures Assigned, (12) Data Element #45 Short Futures Assigned, 

(13) Data Element # 46 Long Transfers Sent, (14) Data Element #47 Long Transfers Received, (15) Data Element 

#48 Short Transfers Sent, and (16) Data Element #49 Short Transfers Received.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

29

changes in positions of special accounts will provide Commission staff with additional information 

for surveillance purposes, and will allow Commission staff to link position data reported at the 

special account level pursuant to regulation 17.00(a) with transaction data reported at the trading 

account level under regulation 16.02. 88 Additionally, information identifying the nature and 

quantity of transactions that resulted in day-to-day changes in positions of special accounts should

provide reporting firms with an additional tool to perform an internal consistency review on data

reported under regulation 17.00(a), and therefore enhance data quality. 

Changes in positions are generally effected by buying and selling contracts; the expiration 

or settlement of contracts, which may result in assignments of contracts; or off-exchange 

transactions, such as block-trades, exchanges of derivatives for related positions (“EDRPs”), and 

transfers. Although the current regulation 17.00(g) record format requires reporting of the 

aggregate of certain EDRPs each day and the total delivery notices issued and stopped via the 

“Report Type” and “Long-Buy-Stopped (Short-Sell-Issued)”89 fields, it otherwise does not capture 

data concerning changes in position. Proposed Appendix C would include data elements necessary 

to capture this information, as follows. 

Contracts Bought and Sold. Proposed Appendix C includes data elements to capture 

“Contracts Bought” and “Contracts Sold.” The current regulation 17.00(g) record format captures 

aggregate positions, but does not reflect the amount of buying and selling associated with a 

particular special account. Obtaining reliable and accurate counts of gross buys and sells 

associated with a special account would enhance the Commission’s ability to differentiate between 

 

88 DCMs identify traders by account numbers, but certain DCMs do not routinely collect detailed trader-identifying 

data. See, e.g., Final Rule, Significant Price Discovery Contracts on Exempt Commercial Markets, 74 FR 12178, 

12185 (Mar. 23, 2009). The Commission instead generally obtains such trader-identifying data from FCMs,

clearing members, and foreign brokers through regulation 17.01. 17 CFR 17.01.

89 17 CFR 17.00(g)(2)(i), (xi).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

30

large position holders that appear passive and large position holders that also trade in significant 

quantities of contracts daily. 

In addition to contracts bought and sold on-exchange, contracts bought or sold via block 

trades are included in the sums reported as “Contracts Bought” and “Contracts Sold.” The 

Commission also expects that contracts acquired through give-ups 90 and allocations will be 

included in the totals of “Contracts Bought” and “Contracts Sold,” as such contracts would be 

treated as positions in the carrying accounts through which they are ultimately cleared rather than 

positions in the accounts that execute the transactions, if such accounts differ from the accounts 

through which such transactions are cleared. 

Exchanges of Derivatives for Related Positions (EDRPs). A DCM’s rules may authorize, 

for bona fide business purposes, privately-negotiated exchanges of derivatives for related 

positions, or “EDRPs.”

91

 As discussed, the current regulation 17.00(g) record format requires 

reporting of aggregate EDRPs, but does not provide more granular data necessary to understand 

whether a position was exchanged for a physical commodity (exchanges for physical, or “EFPs”), 

exchanged for a swap or other derivative (exchanges for swaps, or “EFSs,” sometimes referred to 

as exchanges for risk, or “EFRs”), exchanged for an option, or exchanged for some other related 

position. Proposed Appendix C includes an “Exchanges of Derivatives for Related Positions” data 

element that is defined to require reporting firms to disaggregate EDRP transactions by type of 

EDRP in the form and manner for reporting set forth in the proposed Part 17 Guidebook. The 

 

90 The term “give-up” means an order executed by one broker on behalf of another broker which clears and settles 

the order.

91 See 17 CFR 38.500 (authorizing “exchange[s] of” “[f]utures in connection with a cash commodity transaction,” 

“[f]utures for cash commodities,” and “[f]utures for swaps”). In practice, such transactions are often referred to as 

“exchanges of futures for related positions” or “EFRPs.” The Commission has used the terminology “exchanges of 

derivatives for related positions” or “EDRPs” because it believes this is a more accurate and descriptive term given 

it “include[s] transactions not limited to futures, such as swaps.” Noticed of Proposed Rulemaking, Core Principles 

and Other Requirements for Designated Contract Markets, 75 FR 80572, 80593 (Dec. 22, 2010).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

31

proposed Part 17 Guidebook requires reporting firms to disaggregate reporting of EDRPs into 

EFPs bought and sold, EFSs bought and sold, and exchanges of options for option (“EOOs”)

bought and sold.

92

This would also effect an update to a record format devised largely during the 1970s and 

1980s, before EDRPs other than EFPs were commonly used.93 EFSs, for example, were not 

explicitly authorized under the CEA until 2000, years after the initial regulation 17.00(g) record 

format had been promulgated.94 In 2004, when the Commission amended the regulation 17.00(g) 

record format to require reporting of EDRPs generally, including EFSs, rather than just EFPs, it 

did not require reporting firms to distinguish among these different types of transactions, but rather

required that such reporting “group together all EFPs, EFSs, EFRs, EFOs95 or other exchanges of 

futures for a commodity or for a derivatives position permitted by exchange rules, and report the 

sum under the same category.”96 At the time, the Commission found this to be “an appropriate 

approach because all of these trades are similar in that they permit the exchange of a futures 

 

92 The Commission believes these three categories of EDRPs capture current market practices, but recognizes the 

possibility that a DCM or DCMs may, in the future, introduce additional EDRPs. For example, DCMs could 

conceivably permit exchanges of futures for futures. See, e.g., 75 FR at 80588 (recognizing that the term 

“exchanges of derivatives for related position” describes “a panoply of off-exchange transactions currently offered 

by DCMs” including, in addition to EFPs and EFSs, “exchanges of futures for futures”). The Commission expects 

that if any DCM revises its rulebook to permit an additional type of EDRP transaction, reporting firms would also 

submit disaggregated data reflecting changes of position effected through that type of EDRP transaction. For 

example, if a DCM revised its rulebook to permit exchanges of futures for futures, the proposed Part 17 Guidebook 

would be updated to facilitate reporting firms submitting information reflecting changes in positions resulting from 

exchanges of futures for futures.

93 Cf. CFTC, Division of Trade and Markets: Report on Exchange of Futures for Physicals (1987) (analysis of EFPs 

published in 1987, relying in part on data reported pursuant to regulation 17.00(a)).

94 See, e.g., Concept Release, Regulation of Noncompetitive Transactions Executed on or Subject to the Rules of a 

Contract Market, 63 FR 3708 (Jan. 26, 1998) (requesting comment on whether Commission regulations should be 

modified in order to permit EFSs and exchanges of futures for options); Proposed Rules, Execution of Transactions: 

Regulation 1.38 and Guidance on Core Principle 9, 69 FR 39880, 39881 (July 1, 2004) (proposing amendments to 

regulation 1.38 to permit DCMs to allow exchanges of futures for another derivatives position following the 

Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 amending the CEA to “specifically allow[] the exchange of futures 

for swaps”); see also 7 U.S.C. 7(b)(3).

95 “EFOs” refers to “exchanges of futures for options.” Final Rule, Reporting Levels and Recordkeeping, 69 FR 

76392, 76394 (Dec. 21, 2004).

96 69 FR at 76395.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

32

position for an off-exchange position.”97 The Commission now, based on experience surveilling 

EDRP practices in futures and options markets, proposes to require more granular differentiation 

in reporting of different types of EDRPs. More granular differentiation between the types of offexchange transactions that effect changes in positions will provide a better understanding of the

methods by which traders exit and enter positions. In particular, disaggregated EDRP data allows 

staff to confirm market integrity when there are concerns about a potential squeeze or other matters 

near the expiration of the physical delivery contract. 

Expirations and Settlement of Contracts. In addition to EDRP counts and counts of 

contracts bought and sold, proposed Appendix C would add data elements necessary to capture 

expirations and settlements, including whether options were exercised and contracts assigned. 

Proposed Appendix C would capture such information in “Delivery Notices Stopped,” “Delivery 

Notices Issued,” “Long Options Expired,” “Short Options Expired,” “Long Options Exercised,” 

“Short Options Exercised,” “Long Futures Assigned,” and “Short Futures Assigned” data 

elements. The current regulation 17.00(g) record format captures information concerning delivery 

notices stopped and issued, but does not capture information concerning changes in positions due 

to option expirations and exercises.

Transfers. The Commission also proposes to include “Long Transfers Sent,” “Long 

Transfers Received,” “Short Transfers Sent,” and “Short Transfers Received” data elements to 

capture transfers of contracts that effect a change in position in a special account. This information 

is not directly captured by the current regulation 17.00(g) record format.

Internal Consistency Check for Data Concerning Changes in Position. The inclusion in 

reports required under regulation 17.00(a) of data elements reflecting counts of transactions that 

 

97 Id.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

33

resulted in day-to-day changes in positions would enable reporting firms to perform internal 

consistency checks on position reports before submitting those reports. Specifically, the day-today change in the size of a position for a particular special account should equal the net value of 

contracts bought and sold, EDRPs bought and sold, expirations and assignments of contracts, and 

transfers. 

Request for Comment

The Commission requests comment on all aspects of proposed Appendix C, including the 

proposed data elements enumerated therein. The Commission requests specific comment on the 

following:

(4) Are there any data elements not included in proposed Appendix C that commenters 

believe are necessary to obtain a complete and accurate picture of positions held by large traders? 

If so, please identify such data elements.

(5) Are there any transactions that would effect changes in positions that are not accounted 

for by the Data Elements discussed in Section II.B.2.d above? If so, please identify such 

transactions.

(6) Are there any data elements proposed to be added in Appendix C that commenters 

believe are not necessary to obtain a complete and accurate picture of positions held by large 

traders? If so, please identify such data elements and explain why.

III. Compliance Date

The Commission understands that market participants would require sufficient time to 

revise or build infrastructure to submit data required under regulation 17.00 using the proposed 

new submission standard. In addition, given that proposed Appendix C would require the 

submission of additional data elements beyond the information required by the current regulation 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

34

17.00(g) record format, the Commission understands that reporting firms may need to make 

additional adjustments to reporting systems.

The Commission expects that the compliance date for the rules proposed herein would be 

365 days following publication of a final rule in the Federal Register. 

The Commission also expects to permit reporting firms to begin reporting under the 

proposed new regime for regulation 17.00(a) reports in advance of the compliance date, while 

continuing to permit reporting firms to report under the current regulation 17.00(g) record format. 

The Commission believes that this approach will allow early adopters to realize the advantages of 

reporting using a modern data submission standard while allowing slower adopters sufficient time 

to modify and test reporting systems. 

Request for Comment

The Commission requests comment on all aspects of the proposed compliance date. The 

Commission requests specific comment on the following:

(7) Is the proposed compliance date of 365 days after publication of a final rule in the 

Federal Register an appropriate amount of time for compliance? If not, please propose an 

alternative timeline and provide reasons supporting that alternative timeline.

IV. Related Matters

A. Cost-Benefit Considerations

1. Introduction

Section 15(a)98 of the CEA requires the Commission to consider the costs and benefits of 

its actions before issuing a new regulation or order under the CEA. By its terms, section 15(a) 

does not require the Commission to quantify the costs and benefits of a new rule or to determine 

 

98 7 U.S.C. 19(a).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

35

whether the benefits of the adopted rule outweigh its costs. Rather, section 15(a) requires the 

Commission to “consider the costs and benefits” of a subject rule. Section 15(a) further specifies 

that the costs and benefits of proposed rules shall be evaluated in light of five broad areas of market 

and public concern: (1) Protection of market participants and the public; (2) efficiency, 

competitiveness, and financial integrity of futures markets; (3) price discovery; (4) sound risk 

management practices; and (5) other public interest considerations. In conducting its analysis, the 

Commission may, in its discretion, give greater weight to any one of the five enumerated areas of 

concern and may determine that, notwithstanding its costs, a particular rule is necessary or 

appropriate to protect the public interest or to effectuate any of the provisions or to accomplish 

any of the purposes of the Act. 

Although the Commission believes the proposed amendments would create meaningful 

benefits for market participants and the public, the Commission also recognizes that the proposed 

amendments would impose costs. The Commission has endeavored to enumerate these costs and, 

when possible, assign a quantitative value to the costs reporting entities might face given the 

proposed changes. Where it is not possible to reasonably quantify costs and benefits of the 

proposed amendments, those costs and benefits are discussed qualitatively. 

2. Background

The data required to be reported under regulation 17.00(a) comprise core data used by 

many divisions within the Commission, including the Division of Market Oversight (“DMO”), the 

Office of the Chief Economist (“OCE”), and the Division of Enforcement (“DOE”). In addition, 

regulation 17.00(a) submissions are collated to produce the database from which public COT 

reports are created. COT reports are used by news media, researchers, academics, and industry 

professionals to describe current trends in futures trading, conduct analysis of past trading patterns, 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

36

and inform current market strategies. The current regulation 17.00(g) record format, which 

instructs reporting firms to submit data in an 80-character, Cobol-based format, has been in effect 

since 1986 and was last revised in 2004.99 This current format limits the amount of descriptive 

data that can be included in any given field. This limits the Commission’s ability to capture the 

economic characteristics of certain products in regulation 17.00(a) position reports and, in some 

instances, prevents the Commission from distinguishing a position in one contract from a position 

in another contract. In addition, the current reporting fields do not allow for the granular reporting 

of EDRPs, of certain futures and options contracts, and for complete information reflecting dayto-day changes in position. 

3. Baselines

The costs and benefits considered herein use as a baseline the reporting provided by 

reporting firms under current Part 17 regulations. In particular, entities are currently required to 

report positions for special accounts100 by 9 a.m. on the business day following the trading day101

and to correct errors as they are found by either the Commission or the reporting entity.102 These 

elements of the rule would not change under the new reporting requirements.

The Commission notes that this cost-benefit consideration is based on its understanding 

that the derivatives market regulated by the Commission functions internationally with: (1) 

transactions that involve U.S. entities occurring across different international jurisdictions; (2) 

some entities organized outside of the United States that are registered with the Commission; and 

(3) some entities that typically operate both within and outside the United States and that follow 

substantially similar business practices wherever located. Where the Commission does not 

 

99 See Final Rule, Reporting Levels and Recordkeeping, 69 FR 76392-01, 76394 (Dec. 21, 2004).

100 See 17 CFR 17.00(a).

101 See 17 CFR 17.02(a).

102 17 CFR 17.00(h).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

37

specifically refer to matters of location, the discussion of costs and benefits below refers to the 

effects of the proposed regulations on all relevant derivatives activity, whether based on their 

actual occurrence in the United States or on their connection with, or effect on U.S. commerce.103

4. Proposed Amendments to Part 17 

The Commission proposes two categories of amendments to Part 17. First, the 

Commission proposes to remove current regulation 17.00(g)’s 80-character record format and 

amend regulation 17.03(d) to delegate authority to the Director of the Office of Data and 

Technology to designate a submission standard for reports required under regulation 17.00(a). 

That submission standard would be published in a Part 17 Guidebook, to be published on the 

Commission’s website. The proposed Part 17 Guidebook designates a modern XML submission 

standard for submitting reports required under regulation 17.00(a). Second, the Commission 

proposes adding an Appendix C to Part 17 enumerating data elements to be included in regulation 

17.00(a) reports. The proposed data elements consist of (1) certain data elements currently 

required to be reported under regulation 17.00(g), (2) certain data elements necessary for 

processing files submitted in XML, (3) certain data elements necessary to represent innovative 

contracts that cannot currently be represented using the regulation 17.00(g) format, and (4) data 

elements necessary to understand the transactions that resulted in day-to-day changes in positions 

of large traders. The form and manner for reporting these data elements in proposed Appendix C 

would be provided in the Part 17 Guidebook.

a. Change in submission standard from current regulation 17.00(g) 

record format to a modern data standard designated in a Part 17 

Guidebook

 

103 See, e.g., 7 U.S.C. 2(i). 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

38

Currently, reporting firms submit regulation 17.00(a) position reports using regulation 

17.00(g)’s 80-character record format. The proposed amendments would require such reports to 

be submitted using a submission standard, which would be designated in a Part 17 Guidebook 

published by the Office of Data and Technology on the Commission’s website. The proposed Part 

17 Guidebook would require such submissions to be made using an XML format similar to that 

used in other reporting required by the Commission, including Trade Capture Reports submitted 

pursuant to regulation 16.02 and swap data reports submitted to swap data repositories pursuant to 

Part 43 and Part 45.104 In order to collect and transmit these reports to the Commission, reporting 

firms would have to modify the systems they currently use to report Part 17 data. 

The Commission estimates there are currently over 300 reporting firms submitting 17.00(a) 

reports. Reporting firms are divided between DCMs, FCMs, clearing members, and foreign 

brokers, including some firms that are registered under multiple categories. Over a 30-day period 

in early 2023 there were 310 reporting firms submitting regulation 17.00(a) reports. The 

Commission estimates that approximately 74 of these reporting firms automate the creation of 

regulation 17.00(a) reports and 236 of these firms create and submit regulation 17.00(a) reports 

manually. The Commission believes that reporting firms that currently automate the creation of 

regulation 17.00(a) reports will continue to do so and will submit such reports by secure FTP, and 

that reporting firms that currently manually create regulation 17.00(a) reports will continue these 

practices rather than modifying their systems to facilitate reporting by secure FTP. Firms that 

currently manually create regulation 17.00(a) reports may need to update systems used to manually 

generate those reports. 

1. Benefits

 

104 See, e.g., Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Account Ownership and Control Information, 74 FR 31642, 

31644 (July 2, 2009); 17 CFR 43.7(a)(1); 17 CFR 45.15(a)(2).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

39

The proposed revisions concerning the data submission standard will facilitate more rapid 

data ingestion for the Commission and increased automation in ingesting data required to be 

reported under regulation 17.00(a), which will reduce staff time devoted to data ingestion. 

The proposed revisions concerning the data submission standard should also enhance data 

quality. First, a modern data submission standard should be less error-prone than the current 

regulation 17.00(g) record format. Second, a modern data submission standard should facilitate 

automated, real-time error correction notifications, which will reduce the amount of manual staff 

intervention in the error correction process and should provide reporting firms with more efficient 

timelines for correcting errors. By improving data quality and enabling more rapid corrections of 

errors, the proposed revisions concerning the data submission standard should ensure the 

timeliness of COT reports. 

The proposed revisions concerning the data submission standard should simplify the error 

correction process for reporting firms by automating and accelerating feedback concerning errors. 

The proposed revisions concerning the data submission standard should enhance DMO’s 

ability to monitor the markets, support DOE’s surveillance program, and facilitate OCE research 

projects.

2. Costs

The Commission believes that the changes proposed to Part 17 would cause reporting firms 

to modify their systems to collect and submit data using a new data submission standard. The cost 

of such modifications is likely to vary from entity to entity. Under the proposed Part 17 

Guidebook, reporting firms would submit reports required under regulation 17.00(a) using an 

XML submission standard. 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

40

The Commission expects more sophisticated reporting firms that submit a substantial 

number of daily reports, such as FCMs, will build systems to report using the XML submission 

standard designated in the proposed Part 17 Guidebook, and will arrange to automate daily 

submissions using a secure FTP data feed. The Commission estimates that 74 entities will submit 

reports in in this manner. The Commission estimates those entities would incur a one-time initial 

cost of approximately $29,800 for each entity (200 hours × $149/hour) to modify and test their 

systems, or an estimated aggregate dollar cost of $2,205,200 (74 entities × $29,800).105 The 

Commission understands that some reporting firms today submit reports required under regulation 

17.00(a) manually through the CFTC Portal, and believes that many of those firms would continue 

to do so under the new submission standard. The Commission estimates that 236 entities would 

continue to manually report through the CFTC Portal and would incur a one-time initial cost of 

approximately $1,310 to update their systems (10 hours × $131/hour) for each entity, or an 

estimated aggregate dollar cost of $309,160 (236 entities × $1,310).106 

On an ongoing basis, the Commission believes that the 310 estimated reporting firms 

would incur minimal additional costs above the baseline once setup is complete. However, the 

Commission estimates that approximately 74 entities filing using secure FTP may incur an ongoing 

operation and maintenance cost of $3,576 per year (2 hours per month × $149 per hour) per entity 

to maintain their systems, or an estimated aggregate annual cost of $264,624 (74 entities × $3,756). 

 

105 For costs associated with upgrading reporting systems for secure FTP filers, the Commission estimates that 

modifications and testing will be undertaken by computer and information research scientists, database architects, 

software developers, programmers, and testers. The associated costs are taken from the U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics’ Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, available at https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes_nat, 

and adjusted with a multiple of 2.5 to account for benefits and overhead costs.

106 For costs associated with upgrading reporting systems for CFTC Portal filers, the Commission estimates that the 

necessary modifications will be undertaken by data scientists. The associated costs are taken from the U.S. Bureau 

of Labor Statistics’ Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, available at

https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes_nat, and adjusted with a multiple of 2.5 to account for benefits and overhead 

costs.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

41

In addition, the Commission estimates that 236 entities filing manually would incur ongoing 

additional costs of $3,144 per year (2 hours per month × $131 per hour) per entity to maintain their 

systems, or an estimated aggregate annual cost of $741,984 (236 entities × $3,144). However, the 

Commission believes that costs associated with correcting errors would be reduced due to 

improved data validation at the time of ingest.

These cost estimates are based on a number of assumptions and cover a number of tasks 

required by reporting firms to design, test, and implement an updated data system based on an 

XML submission standard. These tasks include defining requirements, developing an extraction 

query, developing an interim extraction format (such as a CSV, or “comma-separated values,” 

file), developing validations, developing formatting conversions, developing a framework to 

execute tasks on a repeatable basis, and finally, integration and testing.

(C) Request for Comment

The Commission requests comment on the range of costs reporting markets, FCMs, 

clearing members, and foreign brokers would incur to implement an XML submission standard to 

comply with the proposed amendments. Are there additional costs or benefits that the Commission 

should consider? Commenters are encouraged to include both qualitative and quantitative 

assessments of these benefits. 

b. Changes in Data Elements Reported 

As detailed above, the current 80-character regulation 17.00(g) format does not allow for 

flexibility in the reporting of certain types of futures, such as bounded futures, and options, such 

as capped or barrier options. The proposed amendments would enable these products to be 

identified in regulation 17.00(a) reports, and would capture additional information reflecting 

changes in position, including reporting concerning numbers of transfers, reporting of numbers of 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

42

expirations of contracts, and more granular reporting of EDRPs, including specifying the type of 

related product (physical, swap, or option). Additionally, the expanded reporting regime instills 

flexibility such that the proposed Part 17 Guidebook can facilitate reporting of positions in 

products with innovative features. 

(A) Benefits

The proposed additional fields necessary to identify certain contracts will facilitate 

collection of more robust market information for the Commission, including allowing the 

Commission to distinguish between positions in different contracts that may not currently be 

distinguishable. The proposed additional fields necessary to identify changes in positions, 

including more granular information concerning types of EDRPs, would also allow the 

Commission to collect better market information. Additionally, obtaining accurate, granular 

information concerning daily changes in position should improve data quality. These data 

elements will enable reporting firms to perform an internal consistency check to confirm the 

accuracy of data, which should reduce reporting errors. 

Obtaining accurate, granular information concerning daily changes in position would also 

support the Commission’s surveillance and monitoring programs. This data would provide the 

Commission with a more comprehensive understanding concerning the nature of changes in 

positions—as opposed to merely understanding the scope of positions—and should further 

facilitate linking position data reported under regulation 17.00(a)107 with transaction data reporting 

under regulation 16.02.108

(B) Costs

 

107 17 CFR 17.00(a).

108 17 CFR 16.02.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

43

The proposed amendments will require reporting firms to report certain additional data 

elements to the Commission beyond those elements required by the current regulation 17.00(g) 

record format. 

CFTC staff experienced in designing data reporting, ingestion, and validation systems, 

estimate that for the 74 reporting firms that automate reporting through a secure file transfer 

protocol, the process of upgrading and testing systems to collect and report new fields will require 

them to incur on average 400 hours to update, test, and implement the proposed additional data 

elements required by proposed Appendix C, for a total of 29,600 hours across all FTP filers at an 

hourly wage rate of $149. This would amount to total capital and start-up costs of $4,410,400 

across all FTP filers (400 hours × 74 FTP filers × $149 = $4,410,400). In addition, the Commission 

estimates that these firms may each incur one-time costs of up to $1,000 for equipment 

modifications associated with these changes. 

The Commission estimates that the 236 reporting firms that manually input data required 

to be reported under regulation 17.00(a) into the CFTC Portal will incur on average 20 hours to 

implement additional data elements required by proposed Appendix C, or 4,720 total hours across 

all manual filers, at an hourly wage rate of $131 per hour. The Commission estimates that in the 

aggregate manual filers will incur total capital and start-up costs associated with updating, testing 

and implementing new data elements of $618,320 (4,720 hours × $131/hour). 

On an ongoing basis, there would be minimal additional costs related to the addition of 

new data elements, since reporting entities would not be required to submit substantially more 

information than the baseline. For example, the Commission does not believe that the proposed 

amendments are likely to affect the overall number of reports submitted annually under regulation 

17.00(a). However, given the additional data elements required by the proposed amendments, the 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

44

Commission estimates that 74 entities who automate their reporting systems may each incur an 

ongoing operation and maintenance cost of $3,576 per year (2 hours per month × $149 per hour) 

per entity, or an estimated aggregate annual cost of $264,624 (74 entities × $3,576) related to 

implementation of the new data elements. In addition, the Commission estimates that 236 firms 

that manually file reports may incur ongoing operation and maintenance costs of $3,144 per year 

(2 hours per month × $131 per hour) per entity as a result of implementing the proposed 

amendments implementing new data elements, or an estimated aggregate annual cost of $741,984 

(236 entities × $3,144).

These cost estimates are based on a number of assumptions and cover a number of tasks 

required by the reporting firms to design, test, and implement an updated data system based on an 

XML format. These tasks include defining requirements, developing an extraction query, 

developing an interim extraction format (such as a CSV, or “comma-separated values,” file), 

developing validations, developing formatting conversions, developing a framework to execute 

tasks on a repeatable basis, and finally, integration and testing.

Additionally, these costs may be mitigated because certain of the proposed data elements 

are conditional and will only be applicable to a small subset of the reporting firms. For example, 

if a particular FCM is not a participant on an exchange that lists “bounded” or “barrier” contracts, 

that FCM will not be required to report proposed data elements that are conditional and only 

applicable to positions in “bounded” or “barrier” contracts.

(C) Request for Comment

The Commission requests comment on the range of costs reporting markets, FCMs, 

clearing members, and foreign brokers would incur to report the data elements described in the 

proposed amendments. Are there additional costs or benefits that the Commission should 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

45

consider? Are there any data elements proposed to be added in Appendix C that commenters 

believe would be unduly onerous or burdensome to report pursuant to part 17? If so, please identify 

such data elements and explain why. Commenters are encouraged to include both qualitative and 

quantitative assessments of these benefits. Specific areas of interest include the following: the 

necessity of collecting additional fields in order to obtain a complete view of futures and options 

positions across all markets; (ii) evaluations of the accuracy of the Commission’s estimate of the 

burden of the proposed information reporting; (iii) determining whether there are ways to enhance 

the utility of reported information; and (iv) minimizing the burden of additional data collection to 

reporting entities. 

5. Section 15(a) Considerations

CEA Section 15(a)109 requires the Commission to consider the costs and benefits of the 

proposed amendments to Part 17 with respect to the following factors: (1) Protection of market 

participants and the public; (2) efficiency, competitiveness, and financial integrity of futures 

markets; (3) price discovery; (4) sound risk management practices; and (5) other public interest 

considerations. A discussion of these proposed amendments in light of the CEA Section 15(a) 

factors is set out immediately below.

a. Protection of Market Participants and the Public

The Commission expects that the changes to Part 17 reporting will lead to improvements 

in the Commission’s ability to collect data on large traders. The Commission expects better 

validation of data at ingest, leading to more efficient error corrections compared to the old 

reporting format. The Commission expects these enhancements would occur without sacrificing 

the Commission’s ability to perform comprehensive oversight of the market. 

 

109 7 U.S.C. 19(a).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

46

Additionally, reducing the risk of errors and delays in the publication of the COT report 

would benefit the public by providing more accurate data on positions held by large traders.

Furthermore, higher-quality and more granular position data from large traders would 

improve the Commission’s oversight and enforcement capabilities and, in turn, would aid the 

Commission in protecting markets, participants, and the public in general.

b. Efficiency, Competitiveness, and Financial Integrity of Futures 

Markets

The Commission believes the proposed amendments would improve the accuracy and 

completeness of futures and options position data available to the Commission by improving data 

quality and providing Commission staff with a more complete understanding of the products 

comprising certain positions. In particular, the proposed rule would allow for more complete 

reporting of EDRPs and complex futures and options positions. Access to more accurate and 

complete data would in turn assist the Commission with, among other things, evaluating if certain 

traders are in violation of position limits, monitoring concentrations of risk exposures, and 

preventing fraud and market manipulation. In addition, as described above, the proposed 

amendments are expected to improve the efficiency of data reporting and analysis by reducing the 

number of reporting errors and automating data validity and error corrections processes.

c. Price Discovery 

The Commission does not believe the proposed rules would have a significant impact on 

price discovery. 

d. Sound Risk Management Practices. 

The Commission believes the proposed rule changes would improve the data quality 

associated with futures and options position reporting required under regulation 17.00(a). The 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

47

proposed additional data elements would capture more complete product information for certain 

positions and more complete information concerning changes in position would provide the 

Commission with an expanded view of the marketplace that would enable the Commission to more 

effectively identify disruptive or manipulative trading activity. These improvements in the 

reporting would allow the Commission to evaluate risk throughout the futures and related markets. 

The Commission does not believe that the costs arising from the proposed rules would 

threaten the ability of market participants to manage risks. 

e. Other Public Interest Considerations. 

The Commission believes that the increased reliability and detail resulting from 

improvements to data reporting would further other public interest considerations, including 

transparency in the futures market to the public and detection of fraud or manipulation. 

Additionally, the reporting structure would provide additional flexibility to collect information on 

new products developed by exchanges, thereby allowing for those exchanges to innovate and 

respond to the demands of the marketplace while still providing traders’ positions to the 

Commission. 

f. General Request for Comment

The Commission generally requests comment on all aspects of its cost-benefit 

considerations, including the identification and assessment of any costs and benefits not discussed 

herein; data and any other information to assist or otherwise inform the Commission’s ability to 

quantify or qualitatively describe the costs and benefits of the proposed amendments; and 

substantiating data, statistics, and any other information to support positions posited by 

commenters with respect to the Commission’s discussion. The Commission welcomes comment 

on such costs, particularly from existing reporting firms that can provide quantitative cost data 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

48

based on their respective experiences. Commenters may also suggest other alternatives to the 

proposed approach.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act 110 (“RFA”) requires that agencies, in proposing rules, 

consider the impact of those rules on small business or, in the statute’s parlance, “small entities.”111 

These amendments affect large traders, FCMs, and other similar entities. The Commission has 

defined “small entities” as used by the Commission in evaluating the impact of its rules in 

accordance with the RFA.112 In that statement, the Commission concluded that large traders and 

FCMs are not considered small entities for purposes of the RFA. Thus, under section 3(a) of the 

RFA,113 the Chairman, on behalf of the Commission, certifies that this proposed rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Commission 

nonetheless invites comment from any firm which believes that these rules would have a 

significant economic impact on its operations.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) 114 imposes certain requirements on federal 

agencies, including the Commission, in connection with agencies’ conducting or sponsoring any 

collection of information, as defined by the PRA. This proposed rulemaking would result in the 

collection of information within the meaning of the PRA, as discussed below. The proposed 

 

110 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

111 See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA applies to rules subject to notice and comment rulemakings issued pursuant to 

section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b), or any other law. Id.

112 See Policy Statement and Final Establishment of Definitions, 47 FR 18618 (Apr. 30, 1982).

113 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

114 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

49

rulemaking contains collections of information for which the Commission has previously received 

control number 3038-0009 from the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”).115

The Commission is proposing to amend the above information collection to accommodate 

newly proposed and revised information collection requirements for participants in the futures and 

options markets that require approval from OMB under the PRA. The amendments are expected 

to modify the existing annual burden for complying with certain requirements of Part 17. 

Specifically, the Commission is proposing to amend regulations 17.00(a), 17.00(g), 17.00(h), and 

17.03(d), which set out (1) the data submission standard and (2) the data elements for large trader 

reports required to be filed under regulation 17.00(a), among other things.116 The Commission has 

previously estimated that the reporting requirements associated with regulation 17.00 of the 

Commission’s regulations entail an estimated 17,160 burden hours for all reporting firms.116 The 

Commission is revising its total burden estimates for this clearance to reflect updated estimates of 

the number of respondents to the collection. The Commission is also estimating the total capital 

 

115 For the previously approved estimates, see ICR Reference No: 202303-3038-002, available at 

https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=202303-3038-002.

116 The Commission proposes two categories of amendments to Part 17. First, the Commission proposes to remove 

current regulation 17.00(g)’s 80-character record format and amend regulation 17.03(d) to delegate authority to the 

Director of the Office of Data and Technology to determine the form, manner, coding structure, and electronic data 

transmission procedures for reporting the data elements in Appendix C to Part 17 and to determine whether to 

permit or require one or more particular data standards for reports required under regulation 17.00(a). That 

submission standard would be published in a Part 17 Guidebook, to be published on the Commission’s website. The 

proposed Part 17 Guidebook designates a modern XML submission standard for submitting reports required under 

regulation 17.00(a). Second, the Commission proposes adding an Appendix C to Part 17 enumerating data elements 

to be included in regulation 17.00(a) reports. The proposed data elements consist of (1) certain data elements 

currently required to be reported under regulation 17.00(g), (2) certain data elements necessary for processing files 

submitted in XML, (3) certain data elements necessary to represent innovative contracts that cannot currently be 

represented using the regulation 17.00(g) format, and (4) data elements necessary to understand the transactions that 

resulted in day-to-day changes in positions of large traders. The form and manner for reporting these data elements 

in proposed Appendix C would be provided in the Part 17 Guidebook. The burden estimates provided in this section 

take into account the burden associated with reporting using a modern XML submission standard and reporting the 

data elements as set out in proposed Appendix C, in compliance with the proposed Part 17 Guidebook.

116 See ICR Reference No: 202303-3038-002, available at 

https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=202303-3038-002.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

50

and start-up costs and ongoing operation and maintenance costs associated with the proposed 

amendments to the Part 17 regulations described herein.

The Commission is therefore submitting this proposal to the OMB for its review in 

accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) and 5 CFR 1320.11. Responses to this collection of 

information by reporting firms pursuant to the Part 17 regulations would be mandatory. The 

Commission will protect proprietary information according to the Freedom of Information Act117

and 17 CFR 145, “Commission Records and Information.” In addition, CEA section 8(a)(1) 

strictly prohibits the Commission, unless specifically authorized by the CEA, from making public 

“data and information that would separately disclose the business transactions or market positions 

of any person and trade secrets or names of customers.”118 The Commission is also required to 

protect certain information contained in a government system of records according to the Privacy 

Act of 1974.119

The Commission expects that requiring reporting pursuant to a modern data standard will 

not require reporting firms to submit substantially more information than is currently required. 

Accordingly, the Commission is retaining its previous estimated numbers of reports, burden hours 

per report, and average burden hour cost. However, based on review of recent data from 2023, the 

Commission is reducing its estimate of the number of respondents from 330 to 310. Accordingly, 

the Commission is reducing its estimate from the previous 17,160 burden hours for all reporting 

firms120 to 16,120 burden hours. In addition, the Commission anticipates that implementation of 

 

117 5 U.S.C. 552.

118 7 U.S.C. 12(a)(1).

119 5 U.S.C. 552a.

120 See ICR Reference No: 202303-3038-002, available at 

https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=202303-3038-002.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

51

a modern submission standard as proposed in the rules should reduce or eliminate manual 

corrections and resubmissions that occur under the currently operative regulations. 

The aggregate annual estimate for the reporting burden associated with Part 17, as amended 

by the proposal,121 would be as follows:

Estimated number of respondents: 310.

Estimated Average Burden Hours per Respondent: 52 hours.

Estimated total annual burden on Respondents: 16,120 hours.

Frequency of collection: Periodically.

In addition, the Commission anticipates that the proposed rules will result in annual capital 

and start-up costs as well as operating and maintenance costs, consisting of (1) start-up costs to 

implement the proposed rule changes, (2) operating and maintenance costs to implement the 

proposed rule changes, and (3) costs to modify equipment as necessary to comply with the 

proposed rule changes. The Commission estimates that some respondents may report by secure 

FTP (“FTP filers”) and some firms may report manually (“manual filers”), and that the total capital 

and start-up costs will vary based on whether a respondent is an FTP Filer or a Manual Filer. 

The Commission estimates that FTP filers would comprise 74 respondents. The 

Commission estimates that these respondents would incur one-time initial costs associated with 

(1) modifying systems to adopt a new data standard, (2) updating and testing systems to implement 

new data elements, and (3) modifying equipment to implement new data elements. First, the 

Commission estimates that such firms would incur a one-time initial burden of 200 hours per entity 

to modify their systems to adopt changes to the data submission standard described in this proposed 

rulemaking, for a total estimated 14,800 total hours. Second, the Commission estimates that FTP 

 

121 The previous burden estimates for 17 CFR 17.00 are available at Notice, Agency Information Collection 

Activities Under OMB Review, 88 FR 18127 (Mar. 27, 2023).
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

52

filers will incur total capital and start-up costs associated with updating, testing, and implementing 

new data elements of 400 hours, for a total estimated 29,600 hours. Third, the Commission also 

estimates that FTP filers would incur one-time costs of $1,000 to modify equipment to implement 

new data elements. This would amount to $6,689,600 (((200 + 400 hours) × 74 FTP filers × 

$149122)) + (74 FTP filers × $1,000) = $6,689,600). 

In addition, the Commission estimates that as a result of implementing that new data 

submission standard, these 74 FTP filers may incur additional operating and maintenance costs of 

24 hours per year, for 1,776 total hours, resulting in costs of $264,624 (24 hours × 74 FTP filers ×

$149123 = $264,624), and, as a result of implementing new data elements, these 74 FTP filers may 

incur additional operating and maintenance costs of 24 hours per year, for 1,776 total hours, 

resulting in costs of $264,624 (24 hours × 74 FTP filers × $149124 = $264,624). This yields 

additional annual operating and maintenance costs of $529,248 for FTP filers. 

The Commission estimates that manual filers would comprise 236 reporting firms. The 

Commission estimates that these respondents would incur one-time initial costs associated with 

(1) modifying systems to adopt a new data standard and (2) updating and testing systems to 

implement new data elements. First, the Commission estimates such respondents would incur a 

one-time initial burden of 10 hours to modify their systems to implement a new data standard, for 

 

122 For the cost calculations for FTP submitters, Commission staff used a composite (blended) wage rate by 

averaging the hour wages for (1) Computer Research Scientists, (2) Database Architects, (3) Software Developers, 

and (4) Developers, Programmers, and Testers. Per the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, national industry-specific 

occupational employment and wage estimates from May 2021, the mean hourly wage for a computer research 

scientist is $68.58, database architect is $58.58, software developer is $58.17, and developers, programmers, and 

testers is $54.68. See U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, available at

https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes_nat. The average of those wages is $59.42. Commission staff has applied a 

multiplier of 2.5 times to account for benefits and overhead. The Commission is therefore using an hourly wage rate 

of $149 for FTP submitters.

123 See id.

124 See id.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

53

a total estimated 2,360 total hours. Second, the Commission estimates that manual filers will incur 

an average one-time cost of 20 hours to implement additional data elements required by proposed 

Appendix C, for a total estimated 4,720 total hours. This would amount to aggregate one-time 

initial costs of $927,480 ((10 hours + 20 hours) × 236 manual filers × $131125 = $927,480). 

In addition, the Commission estimates that as a result of implementing that new data 

submission standard, these 236 manual filers may incur additional operating and maintenance costs 

of 24 hours per year, for 5,664 total hours, for an associated cost of $741,984 (24 hours × 236 

manual filers × $131126 = $741,984), and, as a result of implementing new data elements, these 

236 manual filers may incur additional operating and maintenance costs of 24 hours per year, for 

5,664 total hours, for an associated cost of $741,984 (24 hours × 236 manual filers × $131127 = 

$741,984). This yields additional annual operating and maintenance costs of $1,483,968 for 

manual filers.

Accordingly, the total estimated capital and start-up costs across all 310 reporting entities 

is $7,617,080 ($6,689,600 + $927,480 = $7,617,080). Based on five-year, straight line 

depreciation, this amounts to annualized total capital and start-up costs for all covered entities of 

$1,523,416. The total estimated annual operating and maintenance costs across all entities is 

$2,013,216 ($529,248 for FTP filers + $1,483,968 for manual filers = $2,013,216). The 

Commission estimates that total annual capital and start-up costs and operation and maintenance 

costs for all covered entities would be $3,536,632 ($1,523,416 + $2,013,216 = $3,536,632).

 

125 For the cost calculations for manual submitters, Commission staff used the wage rate for Data Scientists. Per the 

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, national industry-specific occupational employment and wage estimates from May 

2021, the mean hourly wage for a data scientist is $52.24. See U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Occupational 

Employment and Wage Statistics, available at https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes_nat. Commission staff has 

applied a multiplier of 2.5 times to account for benefits and overhead. The Commission is therefore using an hourly 

wage rate of $131 for manual submitters.

126 See id.

127 See id.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

54

Request for Comment

The Commission invites the public and other Federal agencies to comment on any aspect 

of the proposed information collection requirements discussed above. The Commission will 

consider public comments on this proposed collection of information in:

(1) Evaluating whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information will have a 

practical use;

(2) Evaluating the accuracy of the estimated burden of the proposed collection of 

information, including the degree to which the methodology and the assumptions that the 

Commission employed were valid;

(3) Enhancing the quality, utility, and clarity of the information proposed to be collected; 

and

(4) Minimizing the burden of the proposed information collection requirements on 

reporting firms, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological information collection techniques, e.g., permitting electronic submission of 

responses.

Copies of the submission from the Commission to OMB are available from the CFTC 

Clearance Officer, 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, DC 20581, (202) 418–5160 or from 

https://RegInfo.gov. Organizations and individuals desiring to submit comments on the proposed 

information collection requirements should send those comments to:

• The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 

Room 10235, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, Attn: Desk Officer of the 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission;
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

55

• (202) 395–6566 (fax); or

• OIRAsubmissions@omb.eop.gov (email).

Please provide the Commission with a copy of submitted comments so that comments can 

be summarized and addressed in the final rulemaking, and please refer to the ADDRESSES 

section of this rulemaking for instructions on submitting comments to the Commission. OMB is 

required to make a decision concerning the proposed information collection requirements between 

30 and 60 days after publication of this release in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment to 

OMB is best assured of receiving full consideration if OMB receives it within 30 calendar days of 

publication of this release. Nothing in the foregoing affects the deadline enumerated above for 

public comment to the Commission on the proposed rules.

D. Antitrust Considerations

CEA section 15(b) requires the Commission to take into consideration the public interest 

to be protected by the antitrust laws and endeavor to take the least anticompetitive means of 

achieving the objectives of the CEA in issuing any order or adopting any Commission rule or 

regulation.

The Commission does not anticipate that the proposed amendments to Part 17 would result 

in anti-competitive behavior. The Commission encourages comments from the public on any 

aspect of the proposal that may have the potential to be inconsistent with the antitrust laws or 

anticompetitive in nature.

List of Subjects

17 CFR Part 17

Brokers, Commodity futures, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Swaps.
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

56

For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

proposes to amend 17 CFR chapter I as follows:

PART 17—REPORTS BY REPORTING MARKETS, FUTURES COMMISSION 

MERCHANTS, CLEARING MEMBERS, AND FOREIGN BROKERS

▪ 1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2, 6a, 6c, 6d, 6f, 6g, 6i, 6t, 7, 7a, and 12a.

▪ 2. Revise § 17.00(a)(1) to replace “Except as otherwise authorized by the Commission or its 

designee, such report shall be made in accordance with the format and coding provisions set 

forth in paragraph (g) of this section” with “Except as otherwise authorized by the Commission 

or its designee, such report shall be made pursuant to paragraph (g) of this section.” 

▪ 3. Revise § 17.00(a)(1) to replace “the quantity of exchanges of futures for commodities or for 

derivatives positions and the number of delivery notices issued for each such account by the 

clearing organization of a reporting market and the number stopped by the account” with “the 

number of futures and options contracts bought and sold, the quantity of exchanges of futures

or options for commodities or for derivatives positions, the number of delivery notices issued 

for each such account by the clearing organization of a reporting market and the number 

stopped by the account, the number of long and short options expired and exercised, the 

number of long and short futures assigned, and the number of long and short transfers sent and 

received.”

▪ 4. Revise § 17.00 by revising paragraphs (g) and (h) to read as follows:

§ 17.00 Information to be furnished by futures commission merchants, clearing members, 

and foreign brokers.

* * * * *

(a) * * *
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

57

(g) Media and file characteristics. Except as otherwise approved by the Commission or its 

designee, all of the applicable data elements set forth in appendix C to this Part shall be included 

in a report required by § 17.00(a), and shall be submitted together in a single file. The report 

shall be submitted in the form and manner published by the Commission or its designee pursuant 

to § 17.03.

(h) Correction of errors and omissions. Except as otherwise approved by the Commission or its 

designee, corrections to errors and omissions in data provided pursuant to § 17.00(a) shall be 

submitted in the form and manner published by the Commission or its designee pursuant to § 

17.03.

* * * * *

▪ 6. Amend § 17.03 by revising paragraphs (a) and (d) to read as follows:

§ 17.03 Delegation of authority to the Director of the Office of Data and Technology or the 

Director of the Division of Market Oversight

* * * * *

(a) Pursuant to §§ 17.00(a) and (h), the authority shall be designated to the Director of the Office 

of Data and Technology to determine whether futures commission merchants, clearing members, 

and foreign brokers may report the information required under §§ 17.00(a) and (h) using some 

format other than that required under § 17.00(g) upon a determination that such person is unable 

to report the information using the format, coding structure, or electronic data transmission 

procedures otherwise required. 

(b) * * *

(d) Pursuant to §§ 17.00(a), (g), and (h), the authority shall be designated to the Director of the 

Office of Data and Technology to determine the form, manner, coding structure, and electronic 

data transmission procedures for reporting the data elements in appendix C to this part and to 

determine whether to permit or require one or more particular data standards.

* * * * *

▪ 8. Add appendix C to part 17 to read as follows:

Appendix C to Part 17 – Data Elements

Data Element 

Name

Definition for Data Element

1 Total Message 

Count 

The total number of reports included in the file. 

2 Message Type Message report type. 

3 Sender ID The CFTC-issued reporting firm identifier. 

4 To ID Indicates the report was submitted to the CFTC. 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

58

5 Message 

Transmit 

Datetime 

The date and time the file was created. 

6 Report ID A unique identifier assigned to each position report. 

7 Record Type 

(Action) 

Indicates the action that triggered the Position Report. 

8 Report Date The date of the information being reported. 

9 Reporting Firm 

ID 

CFTC assigned identifier for the reporting firm. 

10 Special Account 

Controller LEI 

The Legal Entity Identifier issued to the special account controller. 

11 Account ID A unique account identifier, assigned by the reporting firm to each 

special account. Assignment of the account number is subject to 

the provisions of § 17.00(b) and Appendix A of this part (Form 

102). 

12 Exchange 

Indicator 

The exchange where the contract is traded. 

13 Commodity 

Clearing Code 

The clearinghouse-assigned commodity code for the futures or 

options contract. 

14 Product Type Type of Product. 

15 Ticker Symbol Ticker symbol of the product traded. 

16 Maturity Month 

Year 

Month and year of the delivery or maturity of the product, as 

applicable. Day must be provided when necessary to characterize a 

product. 

17 Maturity Time The expiration time of an option or last trading time of a future. 

18 Listing Date Product listing date.

19 First Exercise 

Date 

The earliest time at which notice of exercise can be given.

20 Strike Level Numeric option moneyness criterion. 

21 Alpha Strike Non-Numeric option moneyness criterion. 

22 Cap Level Ceiling value of a capped option or bounded future. 

23 Floor Level Floor value of a capped option or bounded future. 

24 Bound or Barrier 

Type 

Behavior of the product when it hits the bound or barrier. 

25 Bound or Barrier 

Level 

Bound or barrier level of a contingent option. 

26 Put or Call 

Indicator 

Nature of the option exercise. 

27 Exercise Style Type of exercise of an option. 

28 Payout Amount Cash amount indicating the payout associated with the product. 

29 Payout Type The type of valuation method or payout trigger. 

30 Underlying 

Contract ID 

The instrument that forms the basis of an option. 
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

59

31 Underlying 

Maturity Month 

Year 

Underlying delivery year and month (and day where applicable). 

32 Long Position The total of long open contracts carried at the end of the day. 

33 Short Position The total of short open contracts carried at the end of the day. 

34 Contracts Bought The total quantity of contracts bought (gross) during the day 

associated with a special account, including all block trades and 

trade allocations such as give-ups, even if the give-ups are 

processed beyond T+1. Do not include exchanges of derivatives 

for related positions EDRPs (EFP, EFS or EFR, EOO) or transfers.

35 Contracts Sold The total quantity of contracts sold (gross) during the day 

associated with a special account, including all block trades and 

trade allocations such as give-ups, even if the give-ups are 

processed beyond T+1. Do not include exchanges of derivatives 

for related positions EDRPs (EFP, EFS or EFR, EOO) or transfers.

36 EDRPs Bought The quantity of purchases of futures or options in connection with 

exchanges of futures or options for related positions (“EDRPs”) 

done pursuant to a DCM’s rules, disaggregated into quantity of 

purchases of futures or options in connection with EDRPs by type 

of EDRP, including exchanges of futures for physical, exchanges 

of futures for risk, exchanges of options for options, and any other 

EDRP offered pursuant to a DCM’s rules.

37 EDRPs Sold The quantity of sales of futures or options in connection with 

EDRPs done pursuant to a DCM’s rules, disaggregated into 

quantity of sales of futures or options in connection with EDRPs by 

type of EDRP, including exchanges of futures for physical, 

exchanges of futures for risk, exchanges of options for options, and 

any other EDRP offered pursuant to a DCM’s rules.

38 Delivery Notices 

Stopped 

The number of futures contracts for which delivery notices have 

been stopped during a day. 

39 Delivery Notices 

Issued 

The number of futures contracts for which delivery notices have 

been issued during a day. 

40 Long Options 

Expired 

Long options positions expired without being exercised. 

41 Short Options 

Expired 

Short options positions expired without being exercised. 

42 Long Options 

Exercised 

Long options positions exercised during the day. 

43 Short Options 

Exercised 

Short options positions exercised during the day. 

44 Long Futures 

Assigned

Long futures assigned as the result of an option exercise.

45 Short Futures 

Assigned

Short futures assigned as the result of an option exercise.

46 Long Transfers 

Sent

Long positions sent through other transfers during the day. (Do 

not include give-ups.)
Voting Copy – As approved by the Commission on 6/7/2023

(subject to pre-publication technical corrections)

60

47 Long Transfers 

Received

Long positions received through other transfers during the day. 

(Do not include give‐ups.)

48 Short Transfers 

Sent

Short positions sent through other transfers during the day. (Do not 

include give-ups.) 

49 Short Transfers 

Received

Short positions received through other transfers during the day. 

(Do not include give‐ups.)

50 Product-Specific 

Terms 

Terms of the contract that are economically material to the 

contract, maintained in the ordinary course of business by the 

reporting market listing the contract, and not otherwise required to 

be reported under the data elements in this Appendix. 

Issued in Washington, DC on __, 2023, by the Commission. 

Christopher J. Kirkpatrick 

Secretary of the Commission