34856 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 8, 2022 / Notices 

1 17 CFR 145.9. 

E. NEPA Lead and Cooperating Agency 

Roles 

NOAA is the lead Federal agency for 

the NEPA process for the proposed 

action. NOAA may invite other Federal, 

Tribal, State, and local government 

agencies to become cooperating agencies 

in the preparation of the EIS for the 

proposed action. NEPA regulations 

specify that a cooperating agency means 

any Federal agency (and a State, Tribal, 

or local agency with agreement of the 

lead agency) that has jurisdiction by law 

or special expertise with respect to any 

environmental impact involved in a 

proposal (or a reasonable alternative) 

(40 CFR 1508.1(e)). 

F. Anticipated Permits, Authorizations, 

and Consultations 

Federal, state, and local permits, 

authorizations, or consultations may be 

required for the proposed action, 

including consultation or review under 

section 304(a)(5) of the NMSA, 16 

U.S.C. 1434(a)(5), regarding consultation 

with appropriate Fishery Management 

Councils, Endangered Species Act, 16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq., Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., National 

Historic Preservation Act, 54 U.S.C. 

300101 et seq., and Executive Order 

13175, consistency review under the 

Coastal Zone Management Act, 16 

U.S.C. 1451 et seq., and possibly 

reviews under other laws and 

regulations determined to be applicable 

to the proposed action. To the fullest 

extent possible, NOAA will prepare a 

DEIS concurrently and integrated with 

analyses required by other Federal 

environmental review requirements, 

and a DEIS will list all Federal permits, 

licenses, and other authorizations that 

must be obtained in implementing the 

proposed action. See 40 CFR 1502.24. 

V. Consultation Under Section 106 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act 

and Executive Order 13175 

This notice confirms that NOAA will 

coordinate its responsibilities under 

section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act (NHPA) during the 

sanctuary designation process and is 

soliciting public and stakeholder input 

to meet section 106 compliance 

requirements. The NHPA section 106 

consultation process specifically applies 

to any agency undertaking that may 

affect historic properties. Pursuant to 36 

CFR 800.16(l)(1), historic properties 

include: ‘‘any prehistoric or historic 

district, site, building, structure, or 

object included in, or eligible for 

inclusion in, the National Register of 

Historic Places maintained by the 

Secretary of the Interior. This term 

includes artifacts, records, and remains 

that are related to and located within 

such properties. The term includes 

properties of traditional religious and 

cultural importance to an Indian Tribe 

or Native Hawaiian organization that 

meet the National Register criteria.’’ 

This notice also confirms that, with 

respect to the proposed sanctuary 

designation process, NOAA will fulfill 

its responsibilities under Executive 

Order 13175, ‘‘Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments,’’ and NOAA’s 

implementing policies and procedures. 

Executive Order 13175 requires Federal 

agencies to establish procedures for 

meaningful consultation and 

coordination with tribal officials in the 

development of Federal policies that 

have Tribal implications. NOAA 

implements Executive Order 13175 

through NOAA Administrative Order 

218–8 (Policy on Government-toGovernment Consultation with 

Federally-Recognized Indian Tribes and 

Alaska Native Corporations), and the 

NOAA Tribal Consultation Handbook. 

Under these policies and procedures, 

NOAA offers affected federally 

recognized Tribes government-togovernment consultation at the earliest 

practicable time it can reasonably 

anticipate that a proposed policy or 

initiative may have Tribal implications. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.; 42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 40 CFR 1500–1508 

(NEPA Implementing Regulations); 

Companion Manual for NOAA 

Administrative Order 216–6A. 

John Armor, 

Director, Office of National Marine 

Sanctuaries, National Ocean Service, 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2022–12234 Filed 6–7–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–NK–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

Request for Information on ClimateRelated Financial Risk 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Request for information. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (‘‘CFTC’’ or 

‘‘Commission’’) is seeking public 

responses to this Request for 

Information to better inform its 

understanding and oversight of climaterelated financial risk as pertinent to the 

derivatives markets and underlying 

commodities markets. Public responses 

to this request will help to inform the 

Commission’s next steps in furtherance 

of its purpose to, among other things, 

promote responsible innovation, ensure 

the financial integrity of all transactions 

subject to the Commodity Exchange Act, 

and avoid systemic risk. The 

information received will also inform 

the Commission’s response to the 

recommendations of the Financial 

Stability Oversight Council 2021 Report 

on Climate-Related Financial Risk and 

inform the ongoing work of the 

Commission’s Climate Risk Unit. The 

Commission may use this information to 

inform potential future actions 

including, but not limited to, issuing 

new or amended guidance, 

interpretations, policy statements, 

regulations, or other potential 

Commission action within its authority 

under the Commodity Exchange Act as 

well as its participation in any domestic 

or international fora. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 8, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by the name of the release, 

‘‘Climate-Related Financial Risk RFI’’, 

by any of the following methods: 

• CFTC Comments Portal: https://

comments.cftc.gov. Select the ‘‘Submit 

Comments’’ link for this release and 

follow the instructions on the Public 

Comment Form. 

• 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: Follow the 

same instructions as for Mail, above. 

Please submit your comments using 

only one of these methods. 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 of your submission 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 8, 2022 / Notices 34857 

2E.g., Financial Stability Oversight Council 

(‘‘FSOC’’), ‘‘Report on Climate-Related Financial 

Risk 2021’’ (Oct. 21, 2021), available at https://

home.treasury.gov/system/files/261/FSOC-ClimateReport.pdf (‘‘FSOC Report’’), at 12. 

3See Financial Stability Board (‘‘FSB’’), ‘‘The 

Implications of Climate Change for Financial 

Stability (Nov. 2020),’’ available at https://

www.fsb.org/2020/11/the-implications-of-climatechange-for-financial-stability/, at 6 (‘‘Increased 

physical risks could result in both market and 

credit risks to the financial system. Market risks— 

that is, the risk of reductions in the value of 

financial assets—could result in losses for banks, 

asset owners, and other financial institutions. 

Market risks might also emerge due to abrupt 

increases in risk premia due to uncertainty 

concerning financial assets’ future payoffs. Physical 

risks can also give rise to credit losses due to 

reductions in the income—or reductions in the 

profitability—of borrowers.’’). 

4See FSOC Report at 101–02 (discussing climate 

change physical-risk implications for financial 

sector operations; regarding the potential impact of 

rising sea levels and increased flood risk in the 

northeastern United States, notes ‘‘the 

concentration of sector critical infrastructure in the 

New York City metro area, . . . home to five of the 

current seven U.S.-based global systemically 

important banks and five of the current eight FSOCdesignated financial market utilities’’). 

5 Id. at 12–13. For example, economic measures 

that raise implicit carbon prices to reduce 

greenhouse gas (‘‘GHG’’) emissions could raise 

transition risk for suppliers and users of GHGintensive production processes, products, or 

services. The FSOC Report notes that ‘‘the financial 

sector may experience credit and market risks 

associated with loss of income, defaults and 

changes in the values of assets, liquidity risks 

associated with changing demand for liquidity, 

operational risks associated with disruptions to 

infrastructure or other channels, or legal risks.’’ Id. 

at 13–14. 

6As relevant here, a ‘‘Registered Entity’’ as 

defined in the Commodity Exchange Act (‘‘CEA’’) 

includes designated contract market (‘‘DCM’’); 

derivatives clearing organization (‘‘DCO’’); swap 

execution facility (‘‘SEF’’); and swap data repository 

(‘‘SDR’’). CEA sec. 1a(40), 7 U.S.C. 1a(40). 

7 ‘‘Registrant’’ means a commodity pool operator 

(‘‘CPO’’); commodity trading advisor (‘‘CTA’’); 

futures commission merchant (‘‘FCM’’); introducing 

broker (‘‘IB’’); leverage transaction merchant; floor 

broker; floor trader; major swap participant 

(‘‘MSP’’); retail foreign exchange dealer; or swap 

dealer (‘‘SD’’) that is subject to the Commission’s 

regulations; or an associated person of any of the 

foregoing other than an associated person of a SD 

or MSP. 17 CFR 1.3 (2021). 

8FSOC Report at section 1. 

9E.O. 14030, 87 FR 27967 (May 20, 2021) 

(Climate-Related Financial Risk), at https://

www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/05/25/ 

2021-11168/climate-related-financial-risk; see also 

E.O. 14008, 86 FR 7619 (January 27, 2021) (Tackling 

the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad), at https:// 

www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/02/01/ 

2021-02177/tackling-the-climate-crisis-at-homeand-abroad; E.O. 13990, 86 FR 7037 (January 20, 

2021) (Protecting Public Health and the 

Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the 

Climate Crisis), at https://www.federalregister.gov/ 

documents/2021/01/25/2021-01765/protectingpublic-health-and-the-environment-and-restoringscience-to-tackle-the-climate-crisis. 

10Executive Order 14030, 87 FR 27968. 

11 Id. More specifically, Executive Order 14030 

directs the FSOC Report to include a discussion of: 

(A) The necessity of any actions to enhance climaterelated disclosures by regulated entities to mitigate 

climate-related financial risk to the financial system 

or assets and a recommended implementation plan 

for taking those actions; (B) any current approaches 

to incorporating the consideration of climate-related 

financial risk into their respective regulatory and 

supervisory activities and any impediments they 

faced in adopting those approaches; (C) 

recommended processes to identify climate-related 

financial risk to the financial stability of the United 

States; and (D) any other recommendations on how 

identified climate-related financial risk can be 

mitigated, including through new or revised 

regulatory standards as appropriate. 

12FSOC Report at 5–9. 

from https://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 responses to the 

Request for Information will be retained 

in the public comment file and may be 

accessible under the FOIA. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Abigail S. Knauff, (202) 418–5123, 

aknauff@cftc.gov, Deputy, Climate Risk 

Unit; Brigitte C. Weyls, (312) 596–0547, 

bweyls@cftc.gov, Assistant Chief 

Counsel, Division of Market Oversight; 

Andrew Ruggiero, (202) 379–8919, 

aruggiero@cftc.gov, Attorney Advisor, 

Market Participants Division; Richard 

Haynes, (202) 418–5063, rhaynes@

cftc.gov, Deputy Director, Division of 

Clearing and Risk; Diana Dietrich, (202) 

418–6767, ddietrich@cftc.gov, Senior 

Assistant General Counsel; or Mark 

Fajfar, (202) 418–6636, mfajfar@cftc.gov, 

Senior Assistant General Counsel, Legal 

Division, Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 

1151 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 

20581. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

A. Climate-Related Financial Risks 

The effects of climate change and the 

transition to a low-carbon economy 

present emerging climate-related 

financial risks, which fall into two 

broad categories: Physical risks and 

transition risks.2 Physical risks 

generally are characterized by harm 

caused by acute, climate-related events 

such as hurricanes, wildfires, floods, 

and heatwaves; and chronic shifts in 

precipitation patterns, sea level rise, and 

ocean acidification.3 These extreme 

weather events and natural disasters, 

especially as they increase in frequency 

and/or intensity, can damage assets, 

disrupt operations, and increase costs.4

Transition risks generally are 

characterized by stresses to certain 

financial institutions or sectors that 

result from shifts in policy, regulations, 

customer and business preferences, 

technology, credit or insurance 

availability, or other market or social 

forces that can affect business 

operations.5

Climate-related financial risk may 

directly or indirectly impact 

Commission registered entities,6

registrants,7 and other market 

participants as well as the derivatives 

markets and the underlying 

commodities markets themselves. 

Effects may include, but are not limited 

to, heightened market volatility, 

disruptions of historical price 

correlations, and challenges to existing 

risk management assumptions. The 

Commission is seeking comment on all 

applicable aspects of its existing 

regulatory framework and market 

oversight, as they may be affected by 

climate-related financial risk. 

B. Executive Order 14030 

On May, 20, 2021, President Biden 

signed Executive Order 14030 on 

Climate-Related Financial Risk 

(‘‘Executive Order 14030’’), which 

outlines a whole-of-government strategy 

to mitigating climate-related financial 

risk. Executive Order 14030 recognizes 

that the failure of financial institutions 

to appropriately and adequately account 

for and measure physical and transition 

risks threatens the competitiveness of 

U.S. companies and markets.8 Executive 

Order 14030 articulates a policy to 

advance the disclosure of climaterelated financial risk and act to mitigate 

that risk and its drivers while achieving 

a net-zero emissions economy by 2050.9

Section 3 of Executive Order 14030 

directs the FSOC, of which the 

Chairman of the Commission is a voting 

member, to consider ‘‘assessing, in a 

detailed and comprehensive manner, 

the climate-related financial risk, 

including both physical and transition 

risks, to the financial stability of the 

Federal Government and the stability of 

the U.S. financial system.’’ 10 Executive 

Order 14030 directs the FSOC to issue 

a report to the President identifying 

FSOC members’ efforts ‘‘to integrate 

consideration of financial risk in their 

policies and programs.’’ 11

C. FSOC Climate-Related Financial Risk 

Report Recommendations 

In response to Executive Order 14030, 

the FSOC issued the Climate-Related 

Financial Risk Report in October 2021 

with thirty-five recommendations for 

the FSOC and its member agencies to: 

(1) Build capacity and expand efforts to 

address climate-related financial risks; 

(2) fill climate-related data and 

methodological gaps; (3) enhance public 

climate-related disclosures; and (4) 

assess and mitigate climate-related risks 

that could threaten the stability of the 

financial system.12 A key 

recommendation is that member 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
34858 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 8, 2022 / Notices 

13 Id. at 5 (Recommendation 1.3). 

14CEA sec. 3(a), 7 U.S.C. 5(a). 

15CEA sec. 3(b), 7 U.S.C. 5(b). 

16 Id. 

17CEA sec. 5, 7 U.S.C. 7; 17 CFR part 38. 

18CEA secs. 1a(50), 5h, 7 U.S.C. 1a(50), 7b–3; 17 

CFR part 37. 

19CEA secs. 1a(48), 21, 7 U.S.C. 1a(48), 24a; 17 

CFR part 49. 

20CEA secs. 1a(15), 5b, 7 U.S.C. 1a(15), 7a–1; 17 

CFR part 39. 

21CEA secs. 1a(28), 4f, 7 U.S.C. 1a(28), 6f; 17 CFR 

3.10. 

22CEA secs. 1a(31); 17 CFR part 1. 

23CEA secs. 1a(49), 4s, 7 U.S.C. 1a(49), 6s; 17 CFR 

3.10, part 23. 

24CEA secs. 1a(33), 4s, 7 U.S.C. 1a(33), 6s; 17 CFR 

3.10, part 23. 

25CEA secs. 1a(11), 4k, 7 U.S.C. 1a(11), 6k; 17 

CFR 3.10, part 4. 

26CEA secs. 1a(12), 4k, 7 U.S.C. 1a(12), 6k; 17 

CFR 3.10, part 4. 

27See Rostin Behnam, Chairman, CFTC, Keynote 

Address at the FIA Boca 2022 International Futures 

Industry Conference, Boca Raton, Florida (Mar. 16, 

2022), at https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/Speeches

Testimony/opabehnam21. 

28Press Release, International Organization of 

Securities Commissions, IOSCO’s 2022 Sustainable 

Finance work plan strengthens the organization’s 

commitment to increasing transparency and 

mitigating greenwashing (Mar. 14, 2022), at https:// 

www.iosco.org/news/pdf/IOSCONEWS635.pdf. 

29Rostin Behnam, Chairman, CFTC, State of the 

CFTC, Testimony Before the H. Comm. on Agric, 

117 Cong. (Mar. 31, 2022), at https://www.cftc.gov/ 

PressRoom/SpeechesTestimony/opabehnam22; see 

also Press Release Number 8368–21, CFTC, ‘‘CFTC 

Acting Chairman Behnam Creates New Climate Risk 

Unit’’ (Mar. 17, 2021), at https://www.cftc.gov/sites/ 

default/files/2020-09/9-9-20%20Report%20

of%20the%20Subcommittee%20on%20ClimateRelated%20Market%20Risk%20- 

%20Managing%20Climate%20Risk%20

in%20the%20U.S.%20Financial%20System%20

for%20posting.pdf. 

agencies, consistent with their legal 

authority, ‘‘expand their respective 

capacities to define, identify, measure, 

monitor, assess, and report on climaterelated financial risks and their effects 

on financial stability.’’ 13 The 

Commission is seeking information and 

feedback on how, consistent with its 

statutory authority, it may responsibly 

act on the FSOC Report’s 

recommendations. The Commission is 

also seeking information to better 

inform any actions it may undertake in 

the future to address climate-related 

financial risk. 

D. Commodity Exchange Act and 

Commission Regulations 

The derivatives markets that the 

Commission oversees pursuant to the 

CEA are ‘‘affected with a national public 

interest’’ because they facilitate risk 

management and price discovery 

‘‘through trading in liquid, fair and 

financially secure trading facilities.’’ 14

The purpose of the CEA is to serve this 

public interest through ‘‘a system of 

effective self-regulation of trading 

facilities, clearing systems, market 

participants and market professionals 

under the oversight of the 

Commission.’’ 15 The Commission’s 

purpose also includes deterring 

disruptions to market integrity, ensuring 

the financial integrity of transactions, 

avoiding systemic risk, and promoting 

responsible innovation and fair 

competition.16 In its oversight of these 

derivatives markets, the Commission 

establishes appropriate tolerances and 

guardrails to minimize market 

disruptions and promote a level playing 

field. 

The Commission’s regulations apply 

to various derivatives market 

participants, including, but not limited 

to, DCMs,17 SEFs,18 SDRs,19 DCOs,20

FCMs,21 IBs,22 SDs,23 MSPs,24 CPOs,25

and CTAs.26 The Commission is seeking 

comment to consider how climaterelated financial risk may affect any of 

its registered entities, registrants, or 

other market participants, and the 

soundness of the derivatives markets. 

This includes assessing how registrants 

and registered entities may need to 

adapt their risk management 

frameworks—including, but not limited 

to, margin models, scenario analysis, 

stress-testing, collateral haircuts, 

portfolio management strategies, 

counterparty and third-party service 

provider risk assessments, and 

enterprise risk management programs— 

as well as how market participants may 

need to adapt their dealing, trading, and 

advisory businesses in the derivatives 

markets. The Commission is also 

seeking comment to understand how 

market participants use the derivative 

markets to hedge and speculate on 

various aspects of physical and 

transition risk, as they exist today and 

as they may evolve in the future.27 The 

Commission aims to consider how it 

may need to adapt its oversight of the 

derivatives markets, including any new 

or amended derivative products created 

to hedge climate-related financial risk. 

The Commission is considering 

climate-related financial risk through 

various workstreams in addition to its 

FSOC participation. Commission staff 

members participate on the FSOC’s 

Climate-Related Financial Risk 

Committee, including its scenario 

analysis and risk assessment working 

groups. Commission staff members also 

participate on Treasury’s Financial 

Literacy and Education Commission 

Study on Climate Change and the 

Financial Resilience of American 

Households and Communities. 

Chairman Rostin Behnam serves as cochair of the Carbon Markets Workstream 

within the International Organization of 

Securities Commissions’ Sustainable 

Finance Task Force.28 Agency 

participation in these initiatives is 

largely staffed from the Commission’s 

Climate Risk Unit, an interdivisional 

staff group led by the Office of the 

Chairman that was formed ‘‘to focus on 

the role of derivatives in understanding, 

pricing, and mitigating climate-related 

risk, and supporting the orderly 

transition to a low-carbon economy 

through market-based initiatives.’’ 29

II. Request for Information 

The Commission is seeking public 

feedback on all aspects of climaterelated financial risk as it may pertain 

to the derivatives markets, underlying 

commodities markets, registered 

entities, registrants, and other related 

market participants. In addition to any 

general input, the Commission is 

interested in responses to the questions 

posed below. The Commission may use 

this information to inform potential 

future actions including, but not limited 

to, the issuance of new or amended 

guidance, interpretations, policy 

statements, or regulations, or other 

potential Commission action. The 

Commission welcomes any relevant 

comments, including on related topics 

that may not be specifically mentioned 

but that a commenter believes should be 

considered. 

Data 

1. What types of data would help the 

Commission evaluate the climaterelated financial risk exposures of 

registered entities, registrants, and other 

participants in the derivative markets 

that the Commission oversees? Are there 

data sources that registered entities, 

registrants, and/or other market 

participants currently use to understand 

and/or assess climate-related financial 

risk? What steps should the Commission 

consider in order to have better access 

to consistent and reliable data to assess 

climate-related financial risks? 

2. Would it help the Commission, 

registered entities, registrants, market 

participants and/or the public to 

understand and/or to manage climaterelated financial risk if Commission 

reporting requirements included 

information about climate-related 

aspects of listed derivatives products, 

reported transactions, and/or open 

positions? Are there data standards or 

definitions that the Commission should 

consider incorporating into any such 

reporting? 

3. What steps should the Commission 

consider to better inform the public of 

its efforts to assess and address climateVerDate Sep<11>2014 16:56 Jun 07, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08JNN1.SGM 08JNN1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 8, 2022 / Notices 34859 

30Network for Greening the Financial System, 

‘‘NGFS Climate Scenarios for Central Banks and 

Supervisors’’ (June 2020), available at https://

www.ngfs.net/sites/default/files/medias/ 

documents/820184_ngfs_scenarios_final_version_

v6.pdf. 

31See generally Financial Stability Board, 

‘‘Supervisory and Regulatory Approaches to 

Climate-Related Risks Interim Report’’ (Apr. 29, 

2022), https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/ 

P290422.pdf. 

32Task Force on Climate-Related Financial 

Disclosures, https://www.fsb-tcfd.org/ (last visited 

May 13, 2022). 33FSOC Report at 7. 

related financial risks? What 

information could the Commission 

publish that would be useful in this 

regard? What steps should the 

Commission consider to make climaterelated data more available to 

registrants, registered entities, other 

market participants, and/or the public 

(as appropriate and subject to any 

applicable data confidentiality 

requirements) in order to help 

understand and/or manage climaterelated financial risk? 

Scenario Analysis and Stress Testing 

4. Are there any climate forecasts, 

scenarios, or other data tools that would 

be useful to the Commission, registered 

entities, and/or registrants to better 

understand the exposure of any 

registered entities or registrants to 

climate-related financial risk and how 

those risks translate to economic and 

financial impacts? 

5. Are there any common scenarios, in 

addition to the scenarios developed by 

the Network for Greening the Financial 

System 30 and/or the Financial Stability 

Board,31 that the Commission should 

consider incorporating into its 

oversight, and/or consider for registered 

entities and/or registrants? 

6. Is a long-term (e.g., 30-year or 50- 

year) stress testing scenario relevant for 

derivatives markets subject to CFTC 

oversight? Is there a more relevant set of 

forward-looking climate relevant 

scenarios? Should these scenarios 

account for geographical stress? Should 

these scenarios try to target certain asset 

types? Can scenarios be customized to 

be more relevant for certain types of 

derivatives markets or registered 

entities? 

7. Should registered entities and 

registrants be required to incorporate 

climate stress tests into their risk 

management processes? Do registered 

entities and registrants have the 

capability currently to conduct climaterelated stress tests? If not, what would 

be needed in order to achieve this 

capability and on what timeline? 

Risk Management 

8. How might registered entities and/ 

or registrants need to adapt their risk 

management frameworks—including, 

but not limited to, margin models, 

scenario analysis, stress-testing, 

collateral haircuts, portfolio 

management strategies, counterparty 

and third-party service provider risk 

assessments, and/or enterprise risk 

management programs—to address 

climate-related financial risk? 

9. Are there ways in which the 

Commission’s existing regulations and/ 

or guidance could better address 

climate-related financial risk, including 

credit risks, market risks, counterparty 

risks, and other financial and 

operational risks? Are there ways in 

which the Commission’s regulations 

and/or guidance relating to risk 

management, system safeguards, 

business continuity, governance, 

recordkeeping, and/or internal audit 

could better address such risk? 

10. Could the Commission’s existing 

regulations and guidance better clarify 

expectations regarding management of 

climate risks, taking into account a 

registered entity’s or registrant’s size, 

complexity, risk profile, and existing 

enterprise risk management processes? 

Would it be helpful for the Commission 

to promulgate regulations or issue 

guidance for registrants and/or 

registered entities regarding the 

implementation of policies and 

procedures to measure, track, and 

account for physical and transition risk? 

11. DCOs’ risk management 

frameworks focus on market risk aspects 

with add-ons for liquidity, 

concentration, wrong way risk, 

settlement risk as well other asset class 

appropriate risks. Should these risk 

management frameworks directly 

incorporate climate-related risk specific 

to clearing member firms, or their 

clients’ climate-related risks, and, if so, 

how? 

12. Should the Commission consider 

amending its minimum capital and 

liquidity requirements to better 

recognize climate-related risks? 

Disclosure 

13. The Commission staff is 

evaluating the Commission’s public 

disclosure, including public 

information, requirements to assess 

whether existing requirements need to 

be updated to effectively provide 

decision-useful, consistent, and 

comparable information on climaterelated risks. Are there ways in which 

updated disclosure requirements could 

aid market participants in better 

assessing climate-related risks? 

14. A goal of climate-related financial 

disclosure is to offer meaningful 

information about climate-related 

financial risks, and to foster increased 

transparency into those risks. In 

connection with any assessment of 

whether updated requirements are 

needed, what specific disclosures, 

building on the Task Force on ClimateRelated Financial Disclosures’ (‘‘TCFD’’) 

four core elements of governance, 

strategy, risk management, and metrics 

and targets,32 would be most helpful for 

the Commission to consider? 

15. Should the Commission, 

consistent with its statutory mandate 

and regulatory authority, consider the 

establishment by registrant category 

(e.g., CPOs, CTAs, FCMs, IBs, and SDs) 

of climate-related risk disclosure 

requirements based on the TCFD’s four 

core elements? 

16. Are there any standardized data 

formats, such as structured data, that the 

Commission should consider for public 

climate-related data disclosures? Would 

the use of complementary protocols, 

where applicable, be helpful for 

comparability across other regulatory 

agencies? 

17. FSOC Report Recommendation 

3.4 33 suggests that FSOC members 

issuing requirements for climate-related 

disclosures consider whether such 

disclosures should include GHG 

emissions, as appropriate and 

practicable, to help determine exposure 

to material climate-related financial 

risks. Should registered entities and 

registrants be required to disclose 

information relating to GHG emissions? 

Product Innovation 

18. What derivatives products are 

currently used to manage climaterelated financial risk, facilitate price 

discovery for climate-related financial 

risk, and/or allocate capital to climatebenefiting projects? Please explain how 

these products are used, negotiated, and 

traded. What, if any, conditions, 

including market practices and/or 

regulatory requirements, may constrain 

or promote their expanded use or 

development to address climate-related 

financial risk? Are there ways in which 

Commission regulations or guidance 

could better address particular 

considerations relating to the listing of 

these types of products for trading? 

19. Are there customer protections or 

other guardrails that the Commission 

could consider to promote market 

integrity in climate-related derivatives 

products? 

20. Are there any potential 

innovations in climate-risk-related 

technology that could shape derivatives 

product innovation or are otherwise 

likely to impact the derivatives markets 

overseen by the Commission? 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
34860 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 8, 2022 / Notices 

1NOAA, ‘‘Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate 

Disasters: Overview,’’ available at https://

www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/. 

2Executive Order 14030 of May 20, 2021, 

Climate-Related Financial Risk, 86 FR 27967 (May 

25, 2021). 

3Financial Stability Oversight Council, ‘‘Report 

on Climate-Related Financial Risk 2021’’ (Oct. 21, 

2021), available at https://home.treasury.gov/ 

system/files/261/FSOC-Climate-Report.pdf. 

21. Are the pricing and terms of 

climate-related derivatives products 

affected by or related to the pricing and 

terms of other products? Are climaterelated derivatives products effective 

hedges for a portion of the risks related 

to transactions in commodities other 

than the commodities underlying the 

derivative products? Are there any 

climate-risk factors that will specifically 

affect derivatives products and their 

respective underlying commodities that 

should be addressed within the 

Commission’s regulations, guidance, or 

oversight of these markets? 

Voluntary Carbon Markets 

22. Are there way in which the 

Commission could enhance the integrity 

of voluntary carbon markets and foster 

transparency, fairness, and liquidity in 

those markets? 

23. Are there aspects of the voluntary 

carbon markets that are susceptible to 

fraud and manipulation and/or merit 

enhanced Commission oversight? 

24. Should the Commission consider 

creating some form of registration 

framework for any market participants 

within the voluntary carbon markets to 

enhance the integrity of the voluntary 

carbon markets? If so, what would a 

registration framework entail? 

Digital Assets 

25. Are digital asset markets creating 

climate-related financial risk for CFTC 

registrants, registered entities, other 

derivatives market participants, or 

derivatives markets? Are there any 

aspects of climate-related financial risk 

related to digital assets that the 

Commission should address within its 

statutory authority? Do digital assets 

and/or distributed ledger technology 

offer climate-related financial risk 

mitigating benefits? 

Financially Vulnerable Communities 

26. Consistent with the CFTC’s 

statutory mandate and regulatory 

authority, what factors are important, 

when the Commission analyzes climaterelated financial risks, to better 

understand the impacts on households 

and communities? 

27. Consistent with the CFTC’s 

statutory mandate and regulatory 

authority, are there any climate-related 

financial impacts or potential policy 

solutions addressed to climate-related 

financial impact that the Commission 

should consider as it pertains to 

financially vulnerable populations in 

particular? Are there any steps that the 

Commission should consider when 

assessing how the impact of climate 

change on the derivatives markets and/ 

or underlying commodities markets, or 

proposed policy solutions to address 

such impact, may affect financially 

vulnerable populations? 

Public-Private Partnerships/Engagement 

28. What mechanism(s), if any, would 

be useful for the Commission to employ 

to foster public-private partnerships to 

address climate-related financial risk 

within the derivatives markets? 

29. Are there experts with whom it 

would be useful for Commission staff to 

collaborate to identify climate forecasts, 

scenarios, and other tools necessary to 

better understand the exposure of 

registered entities and registrants to 

climate-related financial risks and how 

those risks translate into economic and 

financial impacts? 

30. What specific literature and 

research should the Commission review 

and consult related to climate risks as 

applicable to the derivative markets, 

underlying commodities markets, 

registrants, registered entities, or other 

derivatives market participants? 

31. During the IBOR transition, the 

Alternative Reference Rate Committee 

was formed, in part, to identify best 

practices for robustness of inter-bank 

offered rates. Would the formation of a 

similar standard-setting committee be 

useful in the development of climaterelated indices designed for mitigation 

of the long-term risks of climate change, 

such as temperature and sea level rise 

or carbon concentration within the 

atmosphere, or the development of other 

standards or best practices? 

32. Assuming a standard setting 

committee or other body could generate 

information to improve the hedging 

utility of long-dated climate risk 

derivative products, what sort of impact 

might that have on liquidity in those 

products, what benefits might be 

realized by market participants, and 

could one expect a material 

improvement in price discovery for 

long-term climate risk, in general? 

Capacity and Coordination 

33. What steps should the 

Commission consider in order to 

expand its capacity to define, identify, 

measure, monitor, assess, and report on 

climate-related financial risks and their 

effects on financial stability? For 

example, what factors should the 

Commission consider when it looks to 

prioritize staffing, training and expertise 

on climate-related issues? Which 

analytic, data modeling, and monitoring 

methodologies would be helpful to the 

Commission in this regard? 

34. How should the Commission 

coordinate its efforts with international 

groups and other regulatory bodies and 

supervisors? Are there standards, 

definitions, or metrics that could 

facilitate the sharing of relevant climaterelated information amongst regulatory 

bodies and supervisors, and/or their 

analyses and aggregation of climaterelated data? Are there specific steps 

that could be taken to enhance global 

coordination and regulatory comity? 

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 2, 2022, 

by the Commission. 

Christopher Kirkpatrick, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

Appendices To Request for Information 

on Climate-Related Financial Risk— 

Commission Voting Summary and 

Commissioners’ Statements 

Appendix 1—Commission Voting 

Summary 

On this matter, Chairman Behnam and 

Commissioners Johnson and Goldsmith 

Romero voted in the affirmative. 

Commissioners Mersinger and Pham 

concurred. No Commissioner noted in the 

negative. 

Appendix 2—Statement of Support of 

Commissioner Kristin N. Johnson 

According to data gathered by the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s 

(NOAA’s) National Centers for 

Environmental Information, since 1980, the 

United States has sustained more than three 

hundred weather and climate disasters, 

including droughts, floods, severe storms, 

cyclones, wildfires, and winter storm events 

that, in the aggregate, led to costs or damage 

exceeding more than $1 billion.1

Notwithstanding our long history of 

navigating severe-weather related events, the 

increasing frequency, severity, and intensity 

as well as the rising costs of these events 

raise important questions and remarkable 

concerns. 

In May of 2021, President Biden issued an 

Executive Order on Climate-Related 

Financial Risk 2 directing the Secretary of the 

Treasury to engage with Financial Stability 

Oversight Council (FSOC) members to 

consider issuing a report on member 

agencies’ efforts to consider climate-related 

financial risk. In response to the Executive 

Order, the FSOC issued the Report on 

Climate-Related Financial Risk (Report).3

The Report contains thirty-five 

recommendations aimed to: 

(1) Build capacity and expand efforts to 

address climate-related financial risks; 

(2) Fill climate-related data and 

methodological gaps; 

(3) Enhance public climate-related 

disclosures; and 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 8, 2022 / Notices 34861 

1Financial Stability Oversight Council, ‘‘Report 

on Climate-Related Financial Risk 2021’’ (Oct. 21, 

2021), available at https://home.treasury.gov/ 

system/files/261/FSOC-Climate-Report.pdf. 

1All italics in quotations from the RFI are added, 

unless otherwise noted. 

(4) Assess and mitigate climate-related 

risks that could threaten the stability of the 

financial system. 

Today’s Request for Information on 

Climate-Related Financial Risk (RFI) reflects 

the CFTC’s established leadership in 

response to requests to better understand the 

role of voluntary carbon markets as well as 

the agency’s commitment to ensuring a 

comprehensive effort to understand how our 

markets, market participants, including large 

and small agricultural and energy sector 

commercial and end users may be impacted 

by physical risks or acute climate-related 

events and transition risks or the stresses that 

result from shifts in policies, regulations, 

customer preferences, and technology. 

Consistent with the CFTC’s mandate to 

promote the integrity, resilience, and 

vibrancy of the U.S. derivatives markets 

through sound regulation, the RFI seeks 

comments on how climate-related financial 

risk may affect ‘‘registered entities, 

registrants, or other market participants, and 

the soundness of the derivatives markets,’’ 

including an assessment of ‘‘how registrants 

and registered entities may need to adapt 

their risk management frameworks— 

including, but not limited to, margin models, 

scenario analysis, stress-testing, collateral 

haircuts, portfolio management strategies, 

counterparty and third-party service provider 

risk assessments, and enterprise risk 

management programs—as well as how 

market participants may need to adapt their 

dealing, trading, and advisory businesses in 

the derivatives markets.’’ 

These inquiries are well within the ambit 

of the CFTC’s statutory authority and 

continue a long-established tradition of 

engaging in thoughtful dialogue with our 

market participants and diverse stakeholders 

in order to understand their concerns related 

to emerging and evolving risk management 

oversight. Among many complimentary and 

comprehensive efforts, careful evaluation of 

carbon markets may reveal a useful path for 

mitigating climate-related financial risk. This 

RFI is an important step toward learning 

from our market participants how these 

markets may help them to hedge and 

efficiently manage existing and evolving 

climate-related risk. Consequently, I support 

the Commission’s RFI on Climate-Related 

Financial Risk and I look forward to the 

public responses. 

Appendix 3—Statement of Support of 

Commissioner Christy Goldsmith 

Romero 

As expressed in President Biden’s 

Executive Order on Climate-Related 

Financial Risk, a whole-of-government 

approach will lead to greater understanding 

of the financial risks that climate change 

poses, and to the development of effective 

strategies to mitigate those risks. The CFTC 

should be at the forefront of financial 

regulatory efforts to understand, and identify 

actions to mitigate, climate-related financial 

risks that impact CFTC-regulated markets. 

This Request for Information reflects the 

Financial Stability Oversight Council’s 

recommendations for U.S. financial 

regulators, seeks climate-related data, and 

asks questions about the appropriate role of 

the CFTC in this emerging space.1

I support the Commission’s Request for 

Information because it seeks public input on 

both physical risks and transition risks 

related to climate issues that impact our 

markets. First, the Commission can benefit 

significantly in understanding physical 

climate risk directly from those in our 

markets who bear the risk. Second, the 

United States has an opportunity to be a 

leader in emerging voluntary carbon/ 

sustainability markets, and public input can 

help realize that opportunity. 

As a market regulator, the CFTC’s mission 

is to promote the resilience, vibrancy and 

integrity of our derivatives markets. 

Commodities markets have been impacted by 

significant climate disasters such as 

wildfires, hurricanes, flooding, and other 

disaster events that have caused devastating 

financial losses to farmers, ranchers, and 

producers—losses that impact our derivatives 

markets. In determining how to promote the 

resilience and vibrancy of these markets, it is 

appropriate for the Commission to seek data 

and input on climate-related physical risk 

from those in our markets who bear the brunt 

of that risk as well as the public. The 

Commission should be thoughtful and 

deliberate in any future action, and consider 

potential consequences on farmers, ranchers, 

and producers. 

Additionally, the Commission’s role 

extends to promoting responsible innovation, 

which includes the evolution of climate/ 

sustainability products in our markets. There 

is a growing global market demand for 

derivatives products that could serve as a 

hedge against both physical risks of climate 

change as well as transition risks as 

companies move toward a net zero 

environment. With a growing number of 

companies making net zero pledges, there is 

notable interest in carbon offset or 

sustainability products. However, concerns 

about transparency, credibility, and 

greenwashing may hamper the integrity and 

growth of these markets. I look forward to 

public input on whether there are customer 

protections, guardrails or standards that the 

Commission should consider as part of its 

mission to promote market integrity and 

transparency and to keep our markets free of 

fraud and manipulation. The Commission 

has a critical role to play to ensure that our 

markets remain the strongest and safest in the 

world. 

Appendix 4—Concurring Statement of 

Commissioner Summer K. Mersinger 

For the purpose of engaging the public 

through this Request for Information (‘‘RFI’’), 

I concur because I will always support efforts 

to engage market participants, industry, and 

the general public in the policy-making 

process at the Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission (‘‘CFTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’). 

While other agencies may take liberties with 

process in order to impose a ‘‘governmentknows-best’’ approach, traditionally, the 

CFTC has not been that agency. 

However, I do not want my concurrence to 

be mistaken for support of the substance of 

this RFI or all the questions being asked. I 

have strong concerns with the discussion and 

several of the questions included in the RFI 

that extend beyond the scope of our statutory 

jurisdiction. Asking these questions causes 

confusion as to the role that Congress has 

tasked the CFTC to perform in our governing 

statute, the Commodity Exchange Act 

(‘‘CEA’’). Clarity about our statutory 

jurisdiction is foundational to our ability to 

successfully achieve the mission that 

Congress has set for the CFTC in the CEA. 

Reading the RFI, I was struck by the lack 

of concern or interest in legacy agriculture 

contracts and futures markets. Growing up, I 

watched drought, flooding, and violent 

weather destroy our livelihood in a matter of 

hours. I remember many mornings riding in 

my Dad’s truck, surveying what was left of 

our corn fields after a hail storm, or seeing 

the burnt spikes of the wheat that turned too 

soon because of extreme heat and lack of 

rain. The financial risk of climate and 

extreme weather is and has always been real, 

and our farmers and ranchers have been 

using legacy agriculture contracts and the 

futures markets to hedge those risks since the 

inception of those markets. 

With this in mind, where are the questions 

in this RFI about financial risk due to climate 

change on our legacy agriculture contracts 

and futures markets? What is not asked in 

this RFI is just as important as what is asked. 

Not one question focuses on the agricultural 

sector. Is this an unintentional oversight or 

a strategic decision to cut agriculture from 

this conversation? Unfortunately, the RFI 

gives no reason for leaving agriculture out of 

the discussion when our agency’s roots and 

history are embedded in the agriculture 

community. 

With respect to what is asked in the RFI, 

information is only useful if it can further our 

efforts to achieve our mission, which is why 

I find it concerning that we are requesting 

information that we cannot use and not 

asking questions on well-functioning markets 

where climate risk is already hedged. I can 

only conclude that the RFI reflects either 

inadvertent ‘‘mission creep’’ at best, or a 

power grab to expand the CFTC’s authority 

at worst. 

Specific instances in which the RFI 

extends beyond the CFTC’s jurisdictional 

boundaries under the CEA include, but are 

not limited to, the following: 

• The first sentence of Section II (which 

sets out the requests for information) states 

that the Commission ‘‘is seeking public 

feedback on all aspects of climate-related 

financial risk as it may pertain to the 

derivatives markets, underlying commodities 

markets, registered entities, registrants, and 

other related market participants.’’ 1 Let me 

be crystal clear: The CFTC does not regulate 

commodities markets. The CEA provides the 

CFTC with statutory authority to regulate 

only derivatives markets, not commodities 

markets. Requesting feedback on all aspects 

of climate-related financial risk as it may 

pertain to underlying commodities markets 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
34862 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 8, 2022 / Notices 

2CEA sections 3(a), 3(b), 7 U.S.C. 5(a), 5(b). 

1Commodity Exchange Act (‘‘CEA’’) section 

2(a)(1)(A), 7 U.S.C. 2(a)(1)(A). 

2CEA section 3(a), 7 U.S.C. 5(a). 

3CEA section 3(b), 7 U.S.C. 5(b). 

4See Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), as amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996, Public Law 104–121, 110 Stat. 857 (codified 

at 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 

covers a huge expanse of territory that is far 

outside the CFTC’s statutory authority over 

derivatives markets under the CEA. 

• Request no. 3 asks what steps the 

Commission should consider, in addition to 

publishing information in its possession, ‘‘to 

make climate-related data more available to 

registrants, registered entities, other market 

participants, and/or the public (as 

appropriate and subject to any applicable 

data confidentiality requirements) in order to 

help understand and/or manage climaterelated financial risk?’’ This suggests that the 

CFTC has statutory authority under the CEA 

to order, as it deems appropriate, any 

individual or entity to make data available 

for the benefit of registrants, registered 

entities, other market participants, and/or the 

public. It does not. 

• Request no. 18 asks what derivatives 

products ‘‘are currently used to manage 

climate-related financial risk, facilitate price 

discovery for climate-related financial risk, 

and/or allocate capital to climate-benefiting 

projects?’’ In Section 3(a) of the CEA, 

Congress found that the derivatives 

transactions regulated by the CFTC provide 

‘‘a means for managing and assuming price 

risks [and] discovering prices . . .’’ In 

Section 3(b) of the CEA, Congress then 

identified the CEA’s purposes as including 

deterring and preventing manipulation or 

other market disruptions; ensuring the 

financial integrity of transactions; avoiding 

systemic risk; protecting market participants 

from fraud, abusive sales practices, and 

misuses of customer assets; and promoting 

responsible innovation and fair competition.2

Nowhere in the CEA did Congress suggest 

that it is a purpose of the CEA, or the mission 

of the CFTC, to allocate capital—whether to 

climate-benefiting projects or otherwise. 

• Request no. 24 asks whether the 

Commission should consider ‘‘creating some 

form of registration framework for any market 

participants within the voluntary carbon 

markets to enhance the integrity of the 

voluntary carbon markets?’’ The CFTC does 

not have statutory authority under the CEA 

to create a registration framework for market 

participants within voluntary carbon markets 

unless they engage in activities relating to 

derivatives. 

• Request no. 25 asks whether ‘‘digital 

assets and/or distributed ledger technology 

offer climate-related financial risk mitigating 

benefits?’’ The CFTC does not have statutory 

authority under the CEA to regulate digital 

assets or distributed ledger technology except 

to the extent they involve derivatives. 

• Request no. 27 asks whether there are 

‘‘any steps that the Commission should 

consider when assessing how the impact of 

climate change on the derivatives markets 

and/or underlying commodities markets, or 

proposed policy solutions to address such 

impact, may affect financially vulnerable 

populations?’’ The CFTC does not have 

authority under the CEA to take any 

regulatory steps with respect to underlying 

commodities markets, regardless of whether 

they affect financially vulnerable 

populations. 

• Request no. 30 asks what literature and 

research the Commission should consult 

‘‘related to climate risks as applicable to the 

derivatives markets, underlying commodities 

markets, registrants, registered entities, or 

other derivatives market participants?’’ As 

noted above, Congress has not provided the 

CFTC with regulatory authority in the CEA 

with respect to climate risks applicable to 

underlying commodities markets. 

I have no opposition to requesting the 

information we need to consider the 

implications of climate-related financial risk 

in fulfilling our mission under the CEA. But 

I am concerned that requesting information 

on matters over which the CFTC has no 

statutory authority and ignoring 

opportunities to ask questions of market 

participants already using our markets to 

hedge their climate exposure will not further 

the purported goal of this RFI. 

Appendix 5—Concurring Statement of 

Commissioner Caroline D. Pham 

I respectfully concur with the publication 

of the Request for Information (RFI) on 

Climate-Related Financial Risk in the Federal 

Register because it is imperative that the 

public has an opportunity to provide input 

and share expertise. 

In our work in this area, however, we must 

be mindful of our statutory mandate: 

oversight of the commodity derivatives 

markets.1 In particular, as the RFI recognizes, 

our markets are ‘‘affected with a national 

public interest’’ because they facilitate risk 

management and price discovery ‘‘through 

trading in liquid, fair and financially secure 

trading facilities.’’ 2 Further, as the RFI also 

recognizes, the Commodity Exchange Act 

mandates that the Commission serve this 

public interest through our oversight of ‘‘a 

system of effective self-regulation of trading 

facilities, clearing systems, market 

participants and market professionals,’’ and 

by deterring and preventing price 

manipulation and other disruptions to 

market integrity, ensuring the financial 

integrity of transactions in our markets, 

avoiding systemic risk, protecting market 

participants from ‘‘fraudulent or other 

abusive sales practices and misuses of 

customer assets,’’ and promoting 

‘‘responsible innovation and fair 

competition.’’ 3 This statutory mandate bears 

repeating because it makes clear that the 

Commission is a market regulator over our 

markets and products, market infrastructure, 

market integrity, market conduct, market 

participants, and market professionals. 

We are not, for instance, a prudential 

banking regulator like the Fed, OCC, or FDIC, 

nor are we a primarily disclosures-based 

market regulator like the SEC. Keeping our 

focus on our markets, products, and 

purpose—keeping our eyes on the ball—will 

help us avoid the risk of diluting our limited 

resources and potentially straying from our 

core expertise and responsibilities into areas 

already tasked to others. 

As we do our work on climate-related 

financial risks within our statutory 

authority—such as by fostering the 

development of new products and markets to 

manage physical risk and transition risk—we 

also should be thoughtful when considering 

the steps we take. Any actions that may 

impose new obligations and costs on our 

market participants, especially end-users that 

rely upon our markets for hedging, must be 

balanced and carefully considered. 

For registrants that have other regulators 

and are already subject to climate risk 

management frameworks, we should seek to 

harmonize from the start with existing 

prudential and other regulatory regimes in 

order to be efficient and avoid imposing 

duplicative or unnecessarily burdensome and 

complex requirements. 

And most importantly, I caution that for 

any potential future Commission action, we 

must take care to consider the impact on 

small entities and evaluate alternatives that 

would accomplish the objectives of any 

potential rule without unduly burdening the 

substantial numbers of growers, producers, 

and other end-users who depend on our 

markets for risk management and price 

discovery.4 That is, after all, the original 

purpose of our markets and the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2022–12302 Filed 6–7–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. CPSC–2012–0058] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request; Safety Standard for 

Walk-Behind Power Lawn Mowers 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, the Consumer 

Product Safety Commission 

(Commission or CPSC) requests 

comments on a proposed extension of 

approval of a collection of information 

relating to testing and recordkeeping 

requirements in the Safety Standard for 

Walk-Behind Power Lawn Mowers, 

approved previously under OMB 

Control No. 3041–0091. CPSC will 

consider all comments received in 

response to this notice before requesting 

an extension of this collection of 

information from the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). 

DATES: Submit written or electronic 

comments on the collection of 

information by August 8, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. CPSC–2012– 

0058, by any of the following methods: 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES