FINAL 0024 -- Supp Stmt Cust Protection (clean) (4)

SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR REVISION OF INFORMATION COLLECTIONS

OMB CONTROL NUMBER 3038-0024

Justification

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify any legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection. Attach a copy of the appropriate section of each statute and regulation mandating or authorizing the collection of information.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is the independent federal regulatory agency charged with providing various forms of customer protection so that users of the commodity markets can be assured of the financial integrity of the markets and the intermediaries that they employ in their trading activities. Part 1 of the Commission’s regulations requires, among other things, that commodity brokers – known as futures commission merchants (FCMs) comply with minimum capital requirements. In order to monitor compliance with these financial standards, the Commission has required FCMs to file financial monthly reports with the Commission and with the designated self-regulatory organization of which they are members as well as to report to the Commission should capital levels drop below prescribed minimums. (See Commission Rules 1.10, 1.12, 1.15, 1.16 and 1.17, 17 CFR 1.10, 1.12, 1.15, 1.16 and 1.17.)

In June of 2008, the US Congress passed the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-246, 122 Stat. 1651, 2189-2204 (2008), also known as the Farm Bill. The Farm Bill provided the CFTC with new authority with regard to the regulation of off-exchange retail forex transactions. Among other things, it directed the Commission to draft rules effectuating registration provisions for a new category of registrant – the retail foreign exchange dealer, or RFED. Under the terms of the legislation, RFEDs will be subject to the same capital requirements as FCMs that are engaged in retail forex transactions, and therefore subject to the same reporting requirements. Accordingly, this collection has been amended to reflect the financial reporting requirements of the new category of registrant, RFEDs. However, because most, if not all, of the entities expected to register as RFEDs are currently registered as FCMs, the overall burden has not changed under this collection. Rather, a portion of the burden has shifted from FCMs to RFEDs.

In July of 2010, President Obama signed the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), Pub. L. No. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010), giving the Commission the authority to regulate certain swap markets and participants in those markets. Among other things, the Dodd-Frank Act directed the Commission to adopt rules establishing minimum capital and margin requirements for swap dealers (“SDs”) and major swap participants (“MSPs”). Accordingly, an amendment of this collection was submitted to OMB in May 2011 to reflect the reporting and recordkeeping requirements associated with the Commission’s proposed capital and margin rules for SDs and MSPs, as well as with proposed conforming rules for FCMs that will operate as SDs.

Finally, in November 2012, the Commission proposed new rules in an effort to prevent unauthorized usage of customer funds by FCMs and RFEDs, which the Commission is now finalizing. The Commission submitted the proposed amendments to OMB Collection Number 3038-0024 on November 14, 2012. The final rules include modifications to the reporting requirements required by the Commission. These modifications will result in changes to the financial statements filed by FCMs and RFEDs, which are the subject of this OMB Collection Number 3038-0024. Additionally, these rules will make some of the recordkeeping requirements already contained in this OMB Collection Number 3038-0024 into reporting requirements. Finally, these rules will add additional recordkeeping requirements by FCMs in that they will be required to establish and maintain written policies and procedures designed to assure the segregation of customer funds.

2. Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the data would be used. Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the information received from the current collection.

FCMs and RFEDs, as well as SDs and MSPs on the adoption of final rules respecting capital and margin requirements that were proposed in May 2011, each file or will file financial statements with the Commission and the designated self-regulatory organizations (DSROs) of which they are members for the purpose of ensuring that filers are meeting their obligations as a CFTC registrant. Respecting the November 2012 proposal, now being finalized, the data that would be collected, in the form of enhanced reporting to the Commission, is intended to enhance the ability of the Commission and the designated self-regulatory organization to identify problematic financial matters in time to avoid market disruptions that often occur when an FCM or RFED may fail, particularly with respect to the tie-up of customer funds that may result. Additionally, the rules require depository institutions that will hold customer funds for an FCM or RFED to acknowledge that the funds belong to the customers of the FCM or RFED, and not to the FCM or RFED itself.

3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g. permitting electronic submission of responses, and the basis for the decision for adopting this means of collection. Also describe any consideration of using information technology to reduce burden.

The Commission’s procedures enable FCMs and RFEDs to comply with the Rule 1.10 filing requirement by submitting electronic filings to their DSRO, with copies provided to the Commission. The same will be applicable for filing requirements for SDs and MSPs. Much of the information required is included as schedules to such electronic filings.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purposes described in Item 2 above.

See responses to questions 1 and 2. With respect to FCMs that will operate as SDs, the rules being finalized by the Commission will not impose wholly new obligations on FCMs and RFEDs, but rather build upon the existing reporting and recordkeeping associated with minimum financial capital requirements that are already in effect so as to avoid duplicative or inconsistent collections of information. In terms of the acknowledgment letters required under these rules, a form has been developed by the Commission so that significant legal resources will not be needed to comply with the rules. A depository institution will only have to review the terms and execute the form once. FCMs and RFEDs will be required to keep the acknowledgments in their records. However, there are fewer than a score of depository institutions that provide custodial services to FCMs and RFEDs, so retention will impose minimal burden. With respect to the proposed collections for SDs and MSPs, as new registrants these entities previously have not been subject to Commission regulation. Therefore, there is no similar information already available that could be used or modified for use for purposes described in item 1 above.

5. If the collection of information involves small business or other small entities (Item 5 of OMB Form 83-1), describe the methods used to minimize burden.

Information required under these final rules, and the capital and margin rules rules proposed in 2011 that will be applicable to SDs and MSPs, do not affect any small business or small entities. The SDs and MSPs that would be subject to the capital and margin requirements under the Dodd-Frank Act rulemakings published in April and May are expected to comprise only the largest global financial firms, as the statute contemplates. Accordingly, the collections of information in the rules will not involve any small business or small entity.

6. Describe the consequence to the Federal Program or policy activities if the collection were conducted less frequently as well as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing burden.

Without frequent reporting the Commodity Futures Trading Commission would be unable to adequately monitor FCM, RFED, SD, and MSP compliance with financial standards or, as applicable, to provide timely customer protection to maintain the financial integrity of the intermediaries that they employ in their CFTC regulated trading activities and avoid market disruptions in the event of a pending firm failure.

7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a manner:

- requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often than quarterly;

See responses to questions 1, 2 and 6.

- requiring respondents to prepare a written response to a collection of information in fewer than 30 days after receipt of it:

The rules now being finalized will require daily reporting of the customer segregation schedule which is a primary tool in safeguarding of customer funds. Note, however, that the daily preparation and retention of the customer segregation schedule is already a part of OMB Collection 3038-0024, and requiring it to be electronically filed is a minimal change. Additional occasional reporting obligations may require response in fewer than 30 days. These occasional reporting obligations are limited to circumstances in which the financial or operating condition of the registrant may be in question.

In terms of the rules for SDs, MSPs, and FCMs that will operate as SDs, occasional reporting obligations also may require response in fewer than 30 days. These occasional reporting obligations are limited to circumstances in which the SD, MSP, or FCM operating as an SD already has developed and produced such reports to another federal regulatory agency, or circumstances in which the financial or operating condition of the SD, MSP, or FCM may be in question.

- requiring respondents to submit more than an original and two copies of any document;

Respondents are not required to submit more than an original and two copies of any document.

- requiring respondents to retain records other than health, medical, government contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records, for more than three years;

This question does not apply.

- in connection with a statistical survey, that is not designed to produce valid and reliable results that can be generalized to the universe of study;

The proposed regulation does not involve a statistical survey.

- requiring the use of a statistical data classification that has not been reviewed and approved by OMB;

The proposed regulation does not involve the use of statistical data.

- that includes a pledge of confidentiality that is not supported by authority established in statute or regulation, that is not supported by disclosure and data security policies that are consistent with the pledge, or which unnecessarily impedes sharing of data with other agencies for compatible confidential use; or

The agency has procedures to protect the information's confidentiality. These are set forth in 17 CFR Parts 145 and 147.

- requiring respondents to submit proprietary trade secrets, or other confidential information unless the agency can demonstrate that it has instituted procedures to protect the information’s confidentiality to the extent permitted by law.

The agency has procedures to protect the information's confidentiality. These are set forth in 17 CFR Parts 145 and 147.

8. If applicable, provide a copy and identify the date and page number of publication in the Federal Register of the agency’s notice required by 5 CFR 1320.8(d), soliciting comments on the information collection prior to submission to OMB. Summarize public comments received in response to that notice and describe actions taken by the agency in response to these comments. Specifically address comments received on cost and hour burden.

The Commission affirmatively sought comment from the public and from other federal agencies on the information collection requirements of the regulations now being finalized. A copy of the proposed regulation as it appeared in the Federal Register was previously provided and a copy of the final regulation is attached hereto. The proposed capital and margin rules were published in the Federal Register in April and May 2011, with a PRA submission having been made at the time the capital rules were published in May 2011.

Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions and recordkeeping disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported.

The Commission developed the estimates contained in the proposed rulemaking, which are now being finalized, by reviewing similar collections that already have been proposed and approved by OMB. Additionally, the Commission has contacted the DSROs and other persons within the industry regarding the burdens imposed by the final rules. Moreover, the proposed rules were published in the Federal Register, release 77 FR 67866, and the Commission sought public comment on this and other collections associated with the new and amended rules.

With respect to the proposed capital and margin rules that were published in April and May 2011, the Commission sought comments from all interested parties as required by the PRA. The Commission received approximately 150 comments from 80 commenters on the proposed capital rules, in addition to late-filed comments and meetings with commenters during and after the comment period. The Commission additionally received approximately the same number of comments on the proposed margin rules, in addition to late-filed comments and meetings with commenters during and after the comment period. The Commission received several PRA-related comments on its proposals.

One commenter suggested alternatives to a proposal in the capital rule that would require filing a financial report for an SD that is subject to a parent or third-party guarantee, suggesting that the rule should be modified to permit the filing of a financial report of the guarantor rather than the SD. Other commenters suggested that the rule be modified to permit an SD to satisfy financial reporting requirements with a filing of financial reports that have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards in lieu of U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Two commenters objected to the early warning notice requirements that were proposed, which would alert the Commission to financial concerns at an SD that could affect the financial system and may require Commission intervention.

Several commenters suggested alternatives to the provisions of the margin rule that would obligate the execution of credit support agreements with non-financial entities, questioning the costs associated with modifying or putting such agreements in place with counterparties. Some advocated finalizing the margin rule without such requirements, while others proposed adding stronger documentation requirements. A comment additionally was received suggesting that the Commission should not adopt documentation requirements requiring parties to agree upon valuation methodologies in swap documentation.

Finally, commentary was received with respect to the overall costs of the capital and margin rules. Those comments related to the PRA include, in particular, the costs associated with the documentation requirements in the proposed rules. In one comment letter, it was suggested that the costs associated with establishing collateral arrangements pursuant to the rule as proposed could reach $141.8 million per consolidated supervised entity. However, this comment did not estimate the costs of those arrangements vis-à-vis the reporting and recordkeeping requirements alone, nor were the PRA cost estimates in the proposed rules, stated in the form of burden hours, questioned.

With respect to the customer protection proposal now being finalized, the Commission received 117 comments, numerous of which discussed the need for, effectiveness and practicality of various proposed rules, however, none of the commenters questioned the burden estimates provided in the proposed rulemaking or the ICR that was submitted. To the extent that there were comments on the need for, effectiveness and practicality of various proposed rules, they related to the rulemaking as a whole rather than the collections in particular, those comments were addressed in the preamble of the final rulemaking.

Consultation with representatives of those from whom information is to be obtained or those who must compile records should occur at least once every 3 years – even if the collection of information activity is the same as in prior periods. There may be circumstances that may preclude consultation in a specific situation. These circumstances should be explained.

This question does not apply.

9. Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

This question does not apply.

10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.

The Commission does not provide respondents with an assurance of confidentiality beyond that provided by applicable law. The Commission fully complies with section 8(a)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act, which strictly prohibits the Commission, unless specifically authorized by the Commodity Exchange Act, 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.” Moreover, the Commission complies with the Freedom of Information Act regulations it has established, set forth at 17 CFR Part 145, and its Government in the Sunshine Act regulations, set forth at 17 CFR Part 147.

11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private. This justification should include the reasons why the agency considers the questions necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the explanation to be given to persons from whom the information is requested, and any steps to be taken to obtain their consent.

The proposed regulation does not require the giving of sensitive information, as that term is used in Question 11.

12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information. The Statement should:

- Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour burden and an explanation of how the burden was estimated. Unless directed to do so, agencies should not conduct special surveys to obtain information on which to base hour burden estimates. Consultation with a sample (fewer than ten) of potential respondents is desirable. If the hour burden on respondents is expected to vary widely because of differences in activity, size or complexity, show the range of estimated hour burden, and explain the reasons for the variance. Generally, estimates should not include burden hours for customary and usual business practices.

See answer to question 8.

- If the request for approval covers more than one form, provide separate hour burden estimates for each form and aggregate the hour burdens in Item 13 OMB Form 83-I.

- Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents for the hours burden for collections of information, identifying and using appropriate wage rate categories. The cost of contracting our or paying outside parties for information collection activities should not be included here. Instead, this cost should be included in Item 13.

See Attachment A, which adds the burden hours related to this final rulemaking to the most recently finalized rulemakings the most recently approved renewals related to this collection. The burden hours in Attachment A related to this final rulemaking have not changed as noted elsewhere herein. However, the overall burden estimate for the collection, which conglomerates collections that were established at different times, have been adjusted downward. This is due to two factors.

First, the burden hours in this collection were added to a 2010 information collection request that was prepared before the 2009 renewal of information collection was finalized. The burden hours for the 2009 renewal contained a net downward adjustment to the burden hours, which were not reflected in the subsequent revisions proposed to this collection.

Second, the burden hours in this collection have been adjusted by removing the burden hours associated with the non-bank capital and margin rules proposed by the Commission prior to this customer protection rule, but that are not yet finalized. Removing the burden hours associated with the proposed capital and margin rule will most accurately reflect the burden hours for this collection as it has been approved by operation of the Paperwork Reduction Act.¹ Nonetheless, an ICR has been submitted for the capital and margin rules, and when they are finalized, the burden estimates associated with this collection of information with respect to those rules will be added into the gross burden hours for this collection.

Moreover, question 8 has been updated to show the results of the Commission’s consultation with the public through the notice and comment period for the capital and margin rulemaking and the associated information collection. There may be changes to the capital and margin rules when they are finalized, but it is unlikely that the finalization of those rules will significantly increase the information to be collected. The capital and margin information collection therefore is eligible for approval. In the event that the burden is significantly increased with the final rulemaking, the Commission will supplement its information collection request and seek approval from OMB at that time, according to the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act and its implementing regulations.

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information. (Do not include the cost of any hour burden shown in Items 12 and 14).

- The cost estimate should be split into two components; (a) a total capital and start-up cost component (annualized over its expected useful life) and (b) a total operation and maintenance and purchase of services component. The estimates should take into account costs associated with generating, maintaining, and disclosing or providing the information. Include descriptions of methods used to estimate major costs factor including system and technology acquisition, expected useful life of capital equipment, the discount rate(s), and the time period over which costs will be incurred. Capital and start-up costs include, among other items, preparations for collecting information such as purchasing computers and software, monitoring, sampling, drilling and testing equipment, and record storage facilities.

- If cost estimates are expected to vary widely, agencies should present ranges of cost burdens and explain the reasons for the variance. The cost of purchasing or contracting out information collection services should be a part of this cost burden estimate, agencies may consult with a sample of respondents (fewer than ten), utilize the 60-day pre-OMB submission public comment process and use existing economic or regulatory impact analysis associated with the rulemaking containing the information collection, as appropriate.

- Generally, estimates should not include purchases of equipment or services, or portions thereof, made: (1) prior to October 1, 1995, (2) to achieve regulatory compliance with requirements not associated with the information collection, (3) for reasons other than to provide information or keep records for the government, or (4) as part of customary and usual business or private practices.

See Attachment A and response to question 12. There will be a significant one time start-up costs associated with changes to implement the daily filings pursuant to rule 1.10, and the establishment of policies and procedures regarding the safeguarding of customer funds pursuant to rule 1.11(b). However, the other financial reporting requirements either are already applicable or require the reporting of information that FCMs and RFEDs would already keep in the ordinary courses of their business. The same would be applicable to SDs and MSPs with respect to the proposed capital and margin rules. The recordkeeping obligations are routine. And the costs of filing applications and occasional notices with the Commission will be realized at the time the application will be prepared, and are included in the cost estimates that have been presented.

14. Provide estimates of the annualized costs to the Federal Government. Also provide a description of the method used to estimate cost, which should include quantification of hours, operational expenses (such as equipment, overhead, printing and support staff), and any other expense that would not have been incurred without this collection of information. Agencies may also aggregate cost estimates from Items 12, 13, and 14 in a single table.

The primary costs for requesting and reviewing documents under the existing OMB Collection 3038-0024 and this amendment are the salaries and benefits for attorneys and auditors to analyze the information collected. The proposed amendment will add to existing costs, however, the information collected is of the same type and amount as the existing collection.

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items 13 or 14 of the OMB Form 83-I.

The collection now being finalized reflect the adoption of new regulations, and the amendment to existing regulations, designed to enhance the monitoring and security of customer funds.

16. For collection of information whose results are planned to be published for statistical use, outline plans for tabulation, statistical analysis, and publication. Provide the time schedule for the entire project, including beginning and ending dates of the collection of information, completion of report, publication dates, and other actions.

This question does not apply.

17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate.

This question does not apply.

18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19, “Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions,” of OMB Form 83-I.

This question does not apply.

Attachment A

REGULATION OMB COLLECTION #3038-0024		ESTIMATED # OF RESPONDENTS OR RECORDKEEPERS PER YEAR		REPORTS ANNUALLY BY EACH RESPONDENT		TOTAL ANNUAL RESPONSES		ESTIMATED AVERAGE NUMBER OF HOURS PER RESPONSE		ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF HOURS OF ANNUAL BURDEN IN FISCAL YEAR
REPORTING
1.10 FINANCIAL REPORTING BY REGISTRANTS
FCMs		142		12		1,704		2.75		4,686
IBs		513		2		1,026		1		1026
1.10 - ONE TIME INITIAL SYSTEM CHANGES TO IMPLEMENT DAILY FILINGS		72		1		72		40		2,880
1.10 DAILY FINANCIAL REPORTING BY FCMS		72		240		17,280		0.2		3,456
1.10 APPLICANTS FOR REGISTRATION AS FCMS AND IBS FILING FINANCIAL REPORTS		510		1		510		1		510
1.12(a) & (b) - REPORTING BY FCMs/IBs WHO FAIL TO MEET MINIMUM FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS OR WHOSE CAPITAL IS BELOW EARLY WARNING LEVEL
FCM		12		1		12		1		12
IB		11		1		11		1		11
1.12(i) – REPORTING BY FCM IF IT HAS INVESTED CUSTOMER FUNDS IN INVESTMENTS THAT ARE NOT PERMITTED INVESTMENTS		2		1		2		1		2
1.12(j) – REPORTING BY FCM IF A WITHDRAWAL OF CUSTOMER FUNDS CAUSES AMOUNT ON DEPOSIT TO BE LESS THAN TARGETED EXCESS		5		1		5		2		10
1.12(k); 1.12(l), 1.12(m) –REPORTING BY FCM OF A MATERIAL CHANGE IN OPERATION		5		1		5		3		15
1.15(a)(1) - INITIAL FILING OF ORG CHART, RISK MANAGEMENT POLICIES & NON-CUSTOMER ACCT INFORMATION		23		1		23		2		46
1.15(a)(2) – ANNUAL RISK ASSESSMENT FILING REQUIREMENTS		73		1		73		2		146
1.16(e) - WHERE IND. PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT (CPA) FINDS MATERIAL INADEQUACY IN ACCOUNTING SYSTEM, HE MUST NOTIFY EXCHANGE AND COMMISSION		5		1		5		2		10
1.16(f) - REQUEST BY FCM FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AUDITED REPORT		8		1		8		2		16
1.17(c)(6) – ELECTION OF ALTERNATIVE CAPITAL DEDUCTIONS
FCM		8		18		144		0.5		72
IB		0		0		0		0		0
1.17(h)(3)(vi) - FILING OF SUBORDINATION AGREEMENTS WITH THE COMMISSION AND EXCHANGES
FCM		41		3		123		0.5		61.5
IB		23		1		23		0.5		11.5
RFED		15		3		45		0.5		22.5
1.18(b) – PREPARING MONTHLY CAPITAL COMPUTATION
FCM		0		0		0		0		0
IB		0		0		0		0		0
1.20(d) - FCM MUST FILE ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT ACCOUNT CONTAINS CUSTOMER FUNDS		5		1		5		2		10
1.20(g) - ACCESS TO ACCOUNTS OF DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS BY COMMISSION		40		1		40		1.5		60
1.23(c) –FCM MUST FILE NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL		10		1		10		1		10
1.32(d) – FCM MUST FILE DAILY STATEMENT OF SEGREGATION ON 1-FR ELECTRONICALLY		72		200		14,440		0.01		144
1.32(f); 1.32(g) – FCM MUST FILE TWICE MONTLY SEGREGATED INVESTMENT DETAIL REPORT		72		24		1,728		0.08		138
1.55 - FCM MUST DEVELOP AND INCORPORATE NOTICE TO CUSTOMERS INTO OPENING ACCOUNT DOCUMENTS		72		1		72		20		1,440
30.7(d) - FCM OPENING ACCOUNTS FOR DEPOSITING CUSTOMER FUNDS MUST FILE ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT ACCOUNT CONTAINS CUSTOMER FUNDS		56		1		56		0.1		5.6
30.7(d) - COMPLETION OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT LETTERS BY DEPOSITORY INSTITUTION ACKNOWLEDGING THAT ACCOUNT CONTAINS CUSTOMER FUNDS		90		1		90		0.75		68
30.7(m) – FCM MUST FILE DAILY STATEMENT OF SECURED AMOUNTS ON 1-FR ELECTRONICALLY		56		200		11,200		0.01		112
SUBTOTAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS		2,013				48,712				14,959
RECORDKEEPING
1.11(b); 1.11(c) – FCM TO ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN WRITTEN POLICIES AND PROCEDURES RE: SAFEGUARDING CUSTOMER FUNDS		72		1		72		25		1,800
1.11(b) – FCM TO ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN WRITTEN POLICIES AND PROCEDURES RE: SAFEGUARDING CUSTOMER FUNDS		72		1		72		75		5,400
1.14 - FCM TO MAINTAIN RECORDS RE: MATERIAL AFFILIATES		89		1		89		3		267
1.20(a) - FCM OPENING ACCOUNTS FOR DEPOSITING SEGREGATED FUNDS MUST KEEP ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT ACCOUNT CONTAINS CUSTOMER FUNDS		74		5		370		0.75		277.5
1.20(b) - SAME AS 1.20(a) BUT FOR CLEARING ORGANIZATION OPENING ACCOUNT		6		5		30		0.75		22.5
1.20(d) - MAINTENANCE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT ACCOUNT CONTAINS CUSTOMER FUNDS		40		1		40		0.75		30
1.20(g) - DCO ADOPT RULES SUBSTITUTING FOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LETTER		17		1		17		45		765
1.20(g) - DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS DCO ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LETTERS		40		1		40		0.75		30
1.23; 1.32; AND 30.7 - DAILY COMPUTATION OF AMOUNTS TO BE SEGREGATED AND SET ASIDE FOR CUSTOMERS TRADING ON U.S. and NON-U.S. COMMODITY MARKETS		120		200		24,000		0.5		12000
1.26 - NUMBER OF ACKNOWLEDGMENTS TO BE OBTAINED FROM SEGREGATED DEPOSITORIES BY FCMs FOR CUSTOMERS' FUNDS		80		2		160		0.75		120
1.27 - RECORD OF INVESTMENTS OF CUSTOMERS' FUNDS KEPT BY FCMS AND CLEARING ORGANIZATIONS		80		1		80		10		800
1.36(a) - RECORD OF SECURITIES RECEIVED FROM CUSTOMERS TO MARGIN ACCOUNTS		59		1		59		3		177
1.37 - RECORD OF CUSTOMERS' NAMES, ADDRESSES AND OCCUPATIONS; ACCOUNT CONTROLLERS OR GUARANTORS; AND RECORD OF OPEN LONG AND SHORT POSITIONS IN ACCOUNTS CARRIED FOR OTHER FCMs		74		1		74		10		740
1.49 - DENOMINATION OF CUSTOMER FUNDS AND LOCATION OF DEPOSITORIES		104		100		10,400		0.01		104
1.65 - NOTICE OF ACCOUNT TRANSFERS		8		1		8		1		8
1.68 - CUSTOMER AGREEMENT OPTING OUT OF SEGREGATION		0		250		0		0.02		0
30.7(d) - FCM OPENING ACCOUNTS FOR DEPOSITING CUSTOMER FUNDS MUST MAINTAIN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT ACCOUNT CONTAINS CUSTOMER FUNDS		56		1		56		0.75		42
30.7(i) – FCM MUST KEEP A RECORD OF CUSTOMER FUNDS INCLUDING DAILY VALUATION		56		200		11,200		0.5		5,600
SUBTOTAL RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS		1,047				46,767				28,183
TOTAL All REQUIREMENTS		3,060				95,479				43,142

1 Specifically, as required by the PRA, the Commission submitted the proposed information collection request related to the customer protection rules collections, seeking to amend collection 3038-0024, among others, on November 14, 2012, the same date that the proposed rulemaking was published in the Federal Register. See 44 U.S.C. 3507(d)(1)(A), providing for an agency to forward to the Director of OMB or his or her designee a notice of proposed rulemaking with a collection of information subject to notice and comment pursuant to the provisions of 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(B), on or before the date that the proposed rulemaking is published in the Federal Register, together with the ICR in the form required by OMB in 5 CFR 1320.8 and 1320.9. The Commission did not receive public comments on any of the proposed collections from OMB on or before January 13, 2013, within the 60 days established for such comments in the PRA after the notice of proposed rulemaking and the submission of the certified ICR to OMB. See 44 U.S.C. 3507(d)(1)(B), cross-referencing 44 U.S.C. 3508. See also 5 CFR 1320.11(c). Accordingly, the proposed amendments to collection 3038-0024, among the others associated with the customer protection rulemaking, are deemed to be approved by operation of the PRA. See 44 U.S.C. 3507(3). The Commission therefore, pursuant to OMB regulations, requests the assignment of OMB control numbers to the proposed amendments to collections 3038-0024 and the other collections associated with the customer protection rulemaking, which were submitted to OMB for approval on November 14, 2012. Regulations. See 5 CFR 1320.11(i), implementing 44 U.S.C. 3507(d)(3)).