In the Matter of the New York Mercantile Exchange, Inc. Petition To Extend Interpretation Pursuant to Section 1a(12)(C) of the Commodity Exchange Act, 6630-6633 [05-2368]
Download as PDF
6630
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 25 / Tuesday, February 8, 2005 / Notices
unmitigable adverse impact on
subsistence uses of these two species.
Proposed Authorization
NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to
CPA for conducting seismic surveys
from Milne Point to the eastern channel
of the Colville River in the U.S. Beaufort
Sea, provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated. NMFS
has preliminarily determined that the
proposed activity would result in the
harassment of small numbers of marine
mammals; would have no more than a
negligible impact on the affected marine
mammal stocks; and would not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of species or stocks for
subsistence uses.
Information Solicited
NMFS requests interested persons to
submit comments and information
concerning this request (see ADDRESSES).
Dated: February 2, 2005≤
Laurie K. Allen,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05–2443 Filed 2–7–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION
In the Matter of the New York
Mercantile Exchange, Inc. Petition To
Extend Interpretation Pursuant to
Section 1a(12)(C) of the Commodity
Exchange Act
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
ACTION: Order.
AGENCY:
On February 4, 2003, in
response to a petition from the New
York Mercantile Exchange, Inc.
(‘‘NYMEX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) the
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (‘‘Commission’’), issued an
order 1 pursuant to Section 1a(12)(C) of
the Commodity Exchange Act (‘‘Act’’).
The order provides that, subject to
certain conditions, Exchange floor
brokers and floor traders (collectively
referred to hereafter as ‘‘floor members’’)
who are registered with the
Commission, when acting in a
proprietary trading capacity, shall be
deemed to be ‘‘eligible contract
participants’’ as that term is defined in
Section 1a(12) of the Act. The order
(hereafter the ‘‘original order’’ or the
‘‘ECP Order’’) is effective for a two-year
SUMMARY:
1 68
FR 5621 (February 4, 2003).
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:12 Feb 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
period and thus will expire on February
4, 2005.
On January 19, 2005, the Exchange
petitioned the Commission to extend
the original order for a further one-year
period. Based on a review of all the
relevant facts and circumstances,
including its review of a report required
as a condition of the original order,
detailing the experiences of the
Exchange, its floor members and its
clearing members under that order, the
Commission has determined to grant the
Exchange’s petition.
Accordingly, subject to certain
conditions as set forth in this order,
NYMEX floor members, when acting for
their own accounts, are permitted to
continue to enter into certain specified
over-the-counter (‘‘OTC’’) transactions
in exempt commodities pursuant to
Section 2(h)(1) of the Act. In order to
participate, the floor member must have
its OTC trades guaranteed by, and
cleared at NYMEX by, an Exchange
clearing member that is registered with
the Commission as a futures
commission merchant (‘‘FCM’’) and that
meets certain minimum working capital
requirements. This order is effective for
a one-year period commencing on the
expiration date of the original order.
DATES: This order is effective on
February 4, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donald H Heitman, Senior Special
Counsel, Division of Market Oversight,
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, Three Lafayette Center,
1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC
20581. Telephone: 202–418–5041. Email: dheitman@cftc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Statutory Background
Section 1a(12) of the Act, as amended
by the Commodity Futures
Modernization Act of 2000 (‘‘CFMA’’),
Public Law 106–554, which was signed
into law on December 21, 2000, defines
the term ‘‘eligible contract participant’’
(‘‘ECP’’) by listing those entities and
individuals considered to be ECPs.2
2 Included generally in Section 1a(12) as ECPs
are: financial institutions; insurance companies and
investment companies subject to regulation;
commodity pools and employee benefit plans
subject to regulation and asset requirements; other
entities subject to asset requirements or whose
obligations are guaranteed by an ECP that meets a
net worth requirement; governmental entities;
brokers, dealers, and FCMs subject to regulation
and organized as other than natural persons or
proprietorships; brokers, dealers, and FCMs subject
to regulation and organized as natural persons or
proprietorships subject to total asset requirements
or whose obligations are guaranteed by an ECP that
meets a net worth requirement; floor brokers or
floor traders subject to regulation in connection
with transactions that take place on or through the
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Under Sections 2(d)(1), 2(g), and 2(h)(1)
of the Act, OTC transactions 3 entered
into by ECPs in an ‘‘excluded
commodity’’ or an ‘‘exempt
commodity,’’ as those terms are defined
by the Act,4 are exempt from all but
certain requirements of the Act.5 Floor
brokers and floor traders are explicitly
included in the ECP definition only to
the extent that the floor broker or floor
trader acts ‘‘in connection with any
transaction that takes place on or
through the facilities of a registered
entity or an exempt board of trade, or
any affiliate thereof, on which such
person regularly trades.’’ 6
The Act, however, gives the
Commission discretion to expand the
ECP category as it deems appropriate.
Specifically, Section 1a(12)(C) provides
that the list of entities defined as ECPs
shall include ‘‘any other person that the
Commission determines to be eligible in
light of the financial or other
qualifications of the person.’’
II. The Original NYMEX Petition
A. Introduction
By letter dated May 23, 2002, NYMEX
submitted a petition seeking a
Commission interpretation pursuant to
facilities of a registered entity or an exempt board
of trade; individuals subject to total asset
requirements; an investment adviser or commodity
trading advisor acting as an investment manager or
fiduciary for another ECP; and any other person that
the Commission deems eligible in light of the
financial or other qualifications of the person.
3 For these purposes, OTC transactions are
transactions that are not executed on a trading
facility. As defined in Section 1a(33)(A) of the Act,
the term ‘‘trading facility’’ generally means ‘‘a
person or group of persons that constitutes,
maintains, or provides a physical or electronic
facility or system in which multiple participants
have the ability to execute or trade agreements,
contracts, or transactions by accepting bids and
offers made by other participants that are open to
multiple participants in the facility or system.’’
4 Section 1a(14) defines the term ‘‘exempt
commodity’’ to mean a commodity that is not an
excluded commodity or an agricultural commodity.
Section 1a(13) defines the term ‘‘excluded
commodity’’ to mean, among other things, an
interest rate, exchange rate, currency, credit risk or
measure, debt instrument, measure of inflation, or
other macroeconomic index or measure. Although
the term ‘‘agricultural commodity’’ is not defined in
the Act, Section 1a(4) enumerates a non-exclusive
list of several agricultural-based commodities and
products. The broadest types of commodities that
fall into the exempt category are energy and metals
products.
5 OTC transactions in excluded commodities
entered into by ECPs pursuant to Section 2(d)(1) are
generally not subject to any provision of the Act.
OTC transactions in exempt or excluded
commodities that are individually negotiated by
ECPs pursuant to Section 2(g) are also generally not
subject to any provision of the Act. OTC
transactions in exempt commodities entered into by
ECPs pursuant to Section 2(h)(1) are generally not
subject to any provision of the Act other than
antimanipulation provisions and anti-fraud
provisions in certain situations.
6 Section 1a(12)(A)(x) of the Act.
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 25 / Tuesday, February 8, 2005 / Notices
Section 1a(12)(C) of the Act.
Specifically, NYMEX, acting on behalf
of Exchange floor members and member
clearing firms, requested that the
Commission make a determination
pursuant to Section 1a(12)(C) of the Act
that floor members, when acting in a
proprietary capacity, may enter into
certain specified OTC transactions in
exempt commodities pursuant to
Section 2(h)(1) of the Act if such floor
members have obtained a financial
guarantee for such transactions from an
Exchange clearing member that is
registered with the Commission as an
FCM.7 NYMEX suggested that the
permissible OTC transactions be limited
to trading in a commodity that either (1)
is listed only for clearing at the
Exchange,8 or (2) is listed for trading
and clearing at the Exchange and where
Exchange rules provide for the exchange
of futures for swaps (‘‘EFS’’) in that
contract.9 NYMEX further proposed that
such transactions would be subject to
additional conditions and restrictions
7 To qualify for the Section 2(h)(1) exemption, the
transaction must: (1) Be in an exempt commodity,
(2) be entered into by ECPs, and (3) not be entered
into on a trading facility.
8 By letter dated May 24, 2002, NYMEX filed rule
changes implementing an initiative to provide
clearing services for specified energy contracts
executed in the OTC markets. NYMEX certified that
the rules comply with the Act and the
Commission’s regulations. Under the provision,
NYMEX initially listed 25 contracts that are entered
into OTC and accepted for clearing by NYMEX, but
are not listed for trading on the Exchange. In
connection with the NYMEX initiative, on May 30,
2002, the Commission issued an order pursuant to
Section 4d of the Act. The order provides that,
subject to certain terms and conditions, the NYMEX
Clearinghouse and FCMs clearing through the
NYMEX Clearinghouse may commingle customer
funds used to margin, secure, or guarantee
transactions in futures contracts executed in the
OTC markets and cleared by the NYMEX
Clearinghouse with other funds held in segregated
accounts maintained in accordance with Section 4d
of the Act and Commission Regulations thereunder.
9 EFS transactions are permitted at the Exchange
pursuant to NYMEX Rule 6.21A, ‘‘Exchange of
Futures for, or in Connection with, Swap
Transactions.’’ The swap component of the
transaction must involve the commodity underlying
a related NYMEX futures contract, or a derivative,
byproduct, or related product of such a commodity.
In furtherance of its effort to permit OTC clearing
at the Exchange, NYMEX amended the rule to
include as eligible EFS transactions ‘‘any contract
executed off the Exchange that the Exchange has
designated as eligible for clearing at the Exchange.’’
The Division notes that, subsequent to the
Commission’s ECP Order responding to the
Exchange’s original petition, NYMEX listed on its
ClearPort(sm) Trading venue a significant number
of futures contracts modeled after OTC energy swap
agreements. While these futures contracts are
competitively traded on the ClearPort(sm) Trading
market, the vast majority of positions in these
contracts are established via EFS transactions that
are executed non-competitively away from the
Exchange and then submitted to NYMEX via its
ClearPort(sm) Clearing service.
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:12 Feb 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
detailed in the petition and described
below.10
B. Arguments in Support of the Original
Petition
In its original petition, NYMEX
offered supporting arguments based on
both public interest considerations and
a detailed analysis of the Act’s ECP
definition. Those arguments are fully
described in the Federal Register notice
implementing the original 2003 order.11
C. Trading Restrictions and Exchange
Oversight
In its original petition, NYMEX
represented that it would have
appropriate compliance systems in
place to monitor OTC trading by
Exchange floor members.12 NYMEX also
suggested that, consistent with the
standards already applicable to floor
members with respect to their trading
on the Exchange, the Commission
should provide that floor members’
transactions in the permissible contracts
that are not executed on a trading
facility be executed only pursuant to the
Section 2(h)(1) exemption. As indicated
above, all Section 2(h)(1) transactions
would be subject to the Act’s
antimanipulation provisions and, in
certain situations, its antifraud
provisions.13 Finally, the Exchange
represented that it would agree, as a
condition for its members participating
in the OTC markets, to limit OTC
trading by floor members such that the
counterparties to their trades must not
be other floor members for contracts that
are listed for trading on the Exchange.
Thus, for example, floor members could
not be counterparties in connection
with an OTC natural gas swap to be
exchanged for a futures position in the
NYMEX Natural Gas Futures contract.
NYMEX floor members could be
counterparties in connection with a
Chicago Basis swap that is subsequently
cleared at NYMEX through EFS
procedures because that contract is
listed only for clearing at the Exchange.
D. The Commission’s Conclusion
Regarding the Original Petition
After consideration of the original
NYMEX petition, the Commission
determined that NYMEX floor members,
subject to certain conditions and for a
two-year period commencing on the
date of publication of the order in the
Federal Register, would be eligible to be
10 NYMEX also suggested a further limitation on
floor members’ permissible transactions by not
permitting any OTC transactions in electricity
commodities.
11 68 FR 5621 (February 4, 2003).
12 Id.
13 See supra note 5.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6631
ECPs as that term is defined in Section
1a(12) of the Act.14 The floor members
were required to meet the financial
qualifications of an ECP by having a
financial guarantee for the OTC
transactions from a NYMEX clearing
member that is registered as an FCM
and that meets certain minimum
working capital requirements.
The Commission noted that the
execution and clearing of such
transactions has financial implications
for the clearing system.15 Thus, the
Commission added certain safeguards to
the original order to limit the possibility
of a trader entering into OTC
transactions that could create financial
difficulty for the guarantor FCM, the
clearing entity or other clearing firms.
First, the guarantor FCM must clear, at
NYMEX, every OTC transaction for
which it provides such a guarantee.
Second, in order to assure that the
guarantor FCM is adequately
capitalized, the guarantor FCM must
have and maintain at all times
minimum working capital 16 of at least
$20 million.17
The Commission determined to make
the original order effective for a twoyear period in order to provide the
opportunity to evaluate the impact of
the OTC trading on both the OTC
market and on NYMEX. Thus, the
Commission required that NYMEX
submit a report reviewing its
experiences and the experiences of its
floor members and clearing members
with respect to OTC trading, including:
The levels of OTC trading and related
clearing activity; the number of floor
members and clearing members who
participated in these activities; and an
evaluation of whether the Commission
should extend this Order and, if so,
whether any modifications should be
made thereto. This report was to address
14 A NYMEX floor member who is determined to
be an ECP based upon compliance with the
provisions set forth in the Commission’s original
order is an ECP only for the purpose of entering into
transactions executed pursuant to Section 2(h)(1) of
the Act and as described in the order.
15 The Commission noted that the guarantor FCM
could restrict or otherwise condition the trading for
which the guarantee is provided. The guarantor
could, for instance, limit trading to certain
commodities, place financial limits on overall or
daily positions, or restrict trading by number or size
of acceptable transactions.
16 For the purposes of an FCM clearing member,
NYMEX Rule 9.21 defines ‘‘working capital’’ to
mean ‘‘adjusted net capital’’ as defined by CFTC
Regulation 1.17.
17 The original order provided a sliding scale for
the two-year duration of the original order whereby
a clearing member was required to have minimum
working capital of $5 million during the first 12
months, $10 million during the thirteenth through
eighteenth months, and $20 million thereafter. The
final $20 million requirement is carried over into
this order.
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
6632
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 25 / Tuesday, February 8, 2005 / Notices
the first eighteen months of the two-year
period, and was to be submitted to the
Commission no later than 30 days after
the conclusion of that eighteen month
period (i.e., by September 4, 2004). In
fact, the report was incorporated into
the Exchange’s January 19, 2005 petition
to extend the relief granted in the
original petition and thus was not filed
within the timeline set out in the
original order. Nevertheless, the
Commission has determined to accept
this report and not to impose any
sanctions on the Exchange for the late
filing of the report.
III. The Petition to Extend the Relief
A. The Exchange Report
The Exchange’s petition to extend the
relief granted in the original order
includes the required report concerning
the experiences of the Exchange, its
floor members and clearing members
under the original order. At the outset,
the report states that the Exchange
adopted two new rules in connection
with the original order, Rules 6.21F
(‘‘Participation by NYMEX Floor
Members in Special Program for Overthe-Counter Trading with FCM
Guarantee’’) and Rule 9.41 (‘‘Special
Capital Provisions for Clearing Members
Guaranteeing and Clearing OTC
Contracts Executed by NYMEX Floor
Members’’). The Exchange notes that, if
the Commission grants its request for an
extension, it will certify to the
Commission rule amendments to
conform these rules to the terms of the
Commission’s extension.
With respect to compliance oversight,
the Exchange reports that, under Rule
6.21F, floor members are required to
notify the Exchange Compliance
Department prior to any participation in
the program authorized by the ECP
Order, and to submit all executed OTC
transactions to the Exchange for
clearing. Beginning April 1, 2004, the
Exchange also required that notification
to include a specially tailored guarantee
form prepared by Exchange staff. In
addition, the Exchange employs a
special trade type indicator to allow it
to identify EFS transactions. Thus,
Exchange Compliance staff is able to
identify which floor members are
participating in the program under the
ECP Order and whether they are
complying with the notification and
other requirements. Currently, none of
the floor members trading pursuant to
the ECP Order execute orders for
customers in their floor member
capacities. Therefore, they would not be
in a position to take advantage of
customer order information when
trading in a proprietary capacity under
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:12 Feb 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
the ECP Order. In addition, the minimal
amount of trading done under the ECP
Order has been regularly reviewed by
the Exchange’s Compliance Market
Surveillance staff. In addition,
Compliance Market Surveillance staff
monitors for the condition of the ECP
Order that prohibits floor members
participating in this program from
engaging in EFS transactions with each
other. Compliance staff monitors for
compliance with this restriction by
reviewing the trading activity of
participating floor members to check for
trades involving a CTI 1 vs. CTI 1
transaction.
With respect to actual floor member
participation in the program, the
Exchange notes that it has been
‘‘relatively slight to date.’’ Only 12 floor
members participated in the program
overall and only seven were
participating at the time the extension
request was filed. With respect to
volume, the Exchange reports that the
floor members participating in the
program, during the period from March
11, 2003 through January 7, 2005,
participated in cleared transactions
totaling 82,855 lots on the buy side and
79,740 lots on the sell side. In general,
this EFS activity was concentrated in
the smaller cash-settled natural gas or
natural gas basis futures contracts listed
in the NYMEX ClearPort(sm) Clearing
System.
By comparison, the single day volume
for November 4, 2004, the busiest day
experienced by NYMEX’s ClearPort(sm)
Clearing services during that same
period was 147,153 lots. The same press
release announcing that volume record
noted that total 2004 cleared volume for
OTC transactions, as of that date, was
10,858,906 lots. Thus, the contribution
by floor members participating in the
program under the Commission’s ECP
Order ‘‘has been relatively modest.’’
The Exchange attributed this limited
participation to a number of possible
factors. The Exchange noted that, over
recent months, noticeable price
volatility in NYMEX’s core floor-traded
products has provided ample trading
opportunities on the Exchange’s trading
floors in futures products, making it less
necessary for professional futures
traders to look to OTC markets for
trading opportunities. Also, at present,
the Exchange permits EFS transactions
in natural gas futures, but not crude oil,
heating oil or unleaded gasoline futures,
thus making the program of interest
primarily only to those floor members
who already regularly trade in natural
gas futures. In addition, many floor
traders focus on trading in the front
contract month, or the first few listed
months of a contract, whereas the OTC
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
natural gas market emphasizes longer
trading periods, such as quarterly or
seasonal strip trading, so that a floor
trader actively engaging in OTC natural
gas trading would likely need to retain
an additional clerk to manage the OTC
activity. Finally, the requirement that
the clearing FCM guaranteeing a floor
member’s trades under the program
must maintain working capital of $20
million has restricted the number of
clearing members able to participate in
the program and effectively narrowed
the pool of floor members willing to
participate in the program, since it is
difficult (though not impossible) for a
floor member to use his or her regular
clearing FCM for regular futures trading
and another for OTC trades under this
program.
B. The Extension Request
The Exchange notes that its original
petition, and the Commission’s original
ECP Order, were based on an approach
whereby an OTC energy swap would be
converted, via an EFS transaction, to a
futures position maintained at the
Exchange’s clearinghouse. Recently,
however, the Exchange has begun
preparation of a draft filing to register
with the Commission a derivatives
transaction execution facility (DTEF).
As a part of that filing, the Exchange
plans to request that a large number of
the products currently listed on the
NYMEX ClearPort(sm) Trading product
slate be shifted from the DCM to the
DTEF regulatory tier. As part of that
same filing, the Exchange staff
anticipates revisiting the manner in
which off-exchange energy transactions
are submitted to the Exchange for
participation in the ClearPort(sm)
Clearing Service. Any such revision
would require corresponding revisions
in the Commission’s ECP Order.
Therefore, the Exchange suggests that
any substantive changes to the terms of
the order, including the possibility of
making the order permanent, should be
considered in the context of the DTEF
filing. In the meantime, the Exchange
requests that the existing ECP Order be
extended for an additional term of one
year. The Exchange notes that the policy
arguments in favor of the program under
the original ECP Order, summarized in
the Federal Register notice publishing
the order,18 ‘‘remain valid and also
support the continuation of this
program.’’
IV. Conclusion
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined, consistent with the NYMEX
petition of January 19, 2005, that it is
18 68
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
FR 5621 (February 4, 2003).
08FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 25 / Tuesday, February 8, 2005 / Notices
appropriate to issue an order pursuant
to Section 1a(12)(C) of the Act extending
the relief granted in its original February
4, 2003 order whereby, subject to certain
conditions and for a further one-year
period commencing on February 4,
2005, NYMEX floor brokers and floor
traders are included within the
definition of ECPs who can enter into
OTC transactions pursuant to Section
2(h)(1) of the Act. Although this order
applies only to NYMEX and NYMEX
members, the Commission would
welcome, in response to a petition so
requesting, providing substantially
similar relief to other designated
contract markets and members of
designated contract markets.
V. Cost Benefit Analysis
Section 15 of the Act, as amended by
Section 119 of the CFMA, requires the
Commission to consider the costs and
benefits of its action before issuing a
new regulation or order under the Act.
By its terms, Section 15 does not require
the Commission to quantify the costs
and benefits of its action or to determine
whether the benefits of the action
outweigh its costs. Rather, Section 15
simply requires the Commission to
‘‘consider the costs and benefits’’ of the
subject rule or order.
Section 15(a) further specifies that the
costs and benefits of the proposed rule
or order shall be evaluated in light of
five broad areas of market and public
concern: (1) Protection of market
participants and the public; (2)
efficiency, competitiveness, and
financial integrity of futures markets; (3)
price discovery; (4) sound risk
management practices; and (5) other
public interest considerations. The
Commission may, in its discretion, give
greater weight to any one of the five
enumerated areas of concern and may,
in its discretion, determine that,
notwithstanding its costs, a particular
rule or order is necessary or appropriate
to protect the public interest or to
effectuate any of the provisions or to
accomplish any of the purposes of the
Act. The Commission undertook a
detailed costs-benefits analysis in
considering the original order.19 Actual
experience under that order has been
consistent with the Commission’s
analysis.
By extending the essential provisions
of the original 2003 order, this order is
intended to reduce regulatory barriers
by continuing to permit NYMEX
members registered with the
Commission as floor brokers or floor
traders, when acting in a proprietary
capacity, to enter into OTC transactions
19 See
68 FR 5621 at 5624–25 (February 4, 2003).
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:12 Feb 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
in exempt commodities pursuant to
Section 2(h)(1) of the Act if such floor
members have obtained a financial
guarantee for such transactions from an
Exchange clearing member that is
registered with the Commission as an
FCM. The Commission has considered
the costs and benefits of this order in
light of the specific provisions of
Section 15(a) of the Act.
VI. Order
Upon due consideration, and
pursuant to its authority under Section
1a(12)(C) of the Act, the Commission
hereby determines that a NYMEX
member who is registered with the
Commission as a floor broker or a floor
trader, when acting in a proprietary
trading capacity, shall continue to be
deemed to be an eligible contract
participant and may continue to enter
into Exchange-specified OTC contracts,
agreements or transactions in an exempt
commodity under the following
conditions:
1. This Order is effective for one year,
commencing on February 4, 2005.
2. The contracts, agreements or
transactions must be executed pursuant
to Section 2(h)(1) of the Act.
3. The floor broker or floor trader
must have obtained a financial
guarantee for the contracts, agreements
or transactions from a NYMEX clearing
member that:
(a) Is registered with the Commission
as an FCM; and,
(b) Clears the OTC contracts,
agreements or transactions thus
guaranteed.
4. Permissible contracts, agreements
or transactions must be limited to
trading in a commodity that either:
(a) Is listed only for clearing at
NYMEX or
(b) Is listed for trading and clearing at
NYMEX and NYMEX’s rules provide for
exchanges of futures for swaps in that
contract, and each OTC contract,
agreement or transaction executed
pursuant to the order must be cleared at
NYMEX.
5. The floor broker or floor trader may
not enter into OTC contracts,
agreements or transactions with another
floor broker or floor trader as the
counterparty for contracts that are listed
for trading on the Exchange.
6. NYMEX must have appropriate
compliance systems in place to monitor
the OTC contracts, agreements or
transactions of its floor brokers and floor
traders.
7. Clearing members that guarantee
and clear OTC contracts, agreements or
transactions pursuant to this order must
have and maintain at all times
minimum working capital of at least $20
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6633
million. A clearing member must
compute its working capital in
accordance with exchange rules and
generally accepted accounting
principles consistently applied.
8. In the event NYMEX requests a
further modification or extension of the
ECP Order, the request shall include a
report to the Commission reviewing the
experiences of the Exchange and its
floor members and clearing members
under the Order. The report shall
include information on the levels of
OTC trading and related clearing
activity, the number of floor members
and clearing members participating in
the activity, and the Exchange’s reasons
supporting the further modification or
extension of the Order.
This order is based upon the
representations made and supporting
material provided to the Commission by
NYMEX. Any material changes or
omissions in the facts and
circumstances pursuant to which this
order is granted might require the
Commission to reconsider its finding
that the provisions set forth herein are
appropriate. Further, if experience
demonstrates that the continued
effectiveness of this order would be
contrary to the public interest, the
Commission may condition, modify,
suspend, terminate or otherwise restrict
the provisions of this order, as
appropriate, on its own motion.
Issued in Washington, DC on February 2,
2005 by the Commission.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05–2368 Filed 2–7–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351–01–U
CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Sunshine Act; Notice of Closed
Meeting
Corporation for National and
Community Service.
ACTION: Notice of closed meeting of the
Board of Directors.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On Thursday, February 3,
2005, a majority of the Board of
Directors (Board) of the Corporation for
National and Community Service
(Corporation) voted, pursuant to 45 CFR
2505.4, to close public observation for a
meeting on February 7, 2005. The
meeting to be closed involves
discussions of the draft AmeriCorps
rulemaking proposal the Corporation
plans to submit to the Office of
Management and Budget rulemaking
docket. The vote followed a
determination, in accordance with the
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 8, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6630-6633]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-2368]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
In the Matter of the New York Mercantile Exchange, Inc. Petition
To Extend Interpretation Pursuant to Section 1a(12)(C) of the Commodity
Exchange Act
AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
ACTION: Order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On February 4, 2003, in response to a petition from the New
York Mercantile Exchange, Inc. (``NYMEX'' or ``Exchange'') the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (``Commission''), issued an order
\1\ pursuant to Section 1a(12)(C) of the Commodity Exchange Act
(``Act''). The order provides that, subject to certain conditions,
Exchange floor brokers and floor traders (collectively referred to
hereafter as ``floor members'') who are registered with the Commission,
when acting in a proprietary trading capacity, shall be deemed to be
``eligible contract participants'' as that term is defined in Section
1a(12) of the Act. The order (hereafter the ``original order'' or the
``ECP Order'') is effective for a two-year period and thus will expire
on February 4, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 68 FR 5621 (February 4, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 19, 2005, the Exchange petitioned the Commission to
extend the original order for a further one-year period. Based on a
review of all the relevant facts and circumstances, including its
review of a report required as a condition of the original order,
detailing the experiences of the Exchange, its floor members and its
clearing members under that order, the Commission has determined to
grant the Exchange's petition.
Accordingly, subject to certain conditions as set forth in this
order, NYMEX floor members, when acting for their own accounts, are
permitted to continue to enter into certain specified over-the-counter
(``OTC'') transactions in exempt commodities pursuant to Section
2(h)(1) of the Act. In order to participate, the floor member must have
its OTC trades guaranteed by, and cleared at NYMEX by, an Exchange
clearing member that is registered with the Commission as a futures
commission merchant (``FCM'') and that meets certain minimum working
capital requirements. This order is effective for a one-year period
commencing on the expiration date of the original order.
DATES: This order is effective on February 4, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald H Heitman, Senior Special
Counsel, Division of Market Oversight, Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, Three Lafayette Center, 1155 21st Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20581. Telephone: 202-418-5041. E-mail: dheitman@cftc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Statutory Background
Section 1a(12) of the Act, as amended by the Commodity Futures
Modernization Act of 2000 (``CFMA''), Public Law 106-554, which was
signed into law on December 21, 2000, defines the term ``eligible
contract participant'' (``ECP'') by listing those entities and
individuals considered to be ECPs.\2\ Under Sections 2(d)(1), 2(g), and
2(h)(1) of the Act, OTC transactions \3\ entered into by ECPs in an
``excluded commodity'' or an ``exempt commodity,'' as those terms are
defined by the Act,\4\ are exempt from all but certain requirements of
the Act.\5\ Floor brokers and floor traders are explicitly included in
the ECP definition only to the extent that the floor broker or floor
trader acts ``in connection with any transaction that takes place on or
through the facilities of a registered entity or an exempt board of
trade, or any affiliate thereof, on which such person regularly
trades.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Included generally in Section 1a(12) as ECPs are: financial
institutions; insurance companies and investment companies subject
to regulation; commodity pools and employee benefit plans subject to
regulation and asset requirements; other entities subject to asset
requirements or whose obligations are guaranteed by an ECP that
meets a net worth requirement; governmental entities; brokers,
dealers, and FCMs subject to regulation and organized as other than
natural persons or proprietorships; brokers, dealers, and FCMs
subject to regulation and organized as natural persons or
proprietorships subject to total asset requirements or whose
obligations are guaranteed by an ECP that meets a net worth
requirement; floor brokers or floor traders subject to regulation in
connection with transactions that take place on or through the
facilities of a registered entity or an exempt board of trade;
individuals subject to total asset requirements; an investment
adviser or commodity trading advisor acting as an investment manager
or fiduciary for another ECP; and any other person that the
Commission deems eligible in light of the financial or other
qualifications of the person.
\3\ For these purposes, OTC transactions are transactions that
are not executed on a trading facility. As defined in Section
1a(33)(A) of the Act, the term ``trading facility'' generally means
``a person or group of persons that constitutes, maintains, or
provides a physical or electronic facility or system in which
multiple participants have the ability to execute or trade
agreements, contracts, or transactions by accepting bids and offers
made by other participants that are open to multiple participants in
the facility or system.''
\4\ Section 1a(14) defines the term ``exempt commodity'' to mean
a commodity that is not an excluded commodity or an agricultural
commodity. Section 1a(13) defines the term ``excluded commodity'' to
mean, among other things, an interest rate, exchange rate, currency,
credit risk or measure, debt instrument, measure of inflation, or
other macroeconomic index or measure. Although the term
``agricultural commodity'' is not defined in the Act, Section 1a(4)
enumerates a non-exclusive list of several agricultural-based
commodities and products. The broadest types of commodities that
fall into the exempt category are energy and metals products.
\5\ OTC transactions in excluded commodities entered into by
ECPs pursuant to Section 2(d)(1) are generally not subject to any
provision of the Act. OTC transactions in exempt or excluded
commodities that are individually negotiated by ECPs pursuant to
Section 2(g) are also generally not subject to any provision of the
Act. OTC transactions in exempt commodities entered into by ECPs
pursuant to Section 2(h)(1) are generally not subject to any
provision of the Act other than antimanipulation provisions and
anti-fraud provisions in certain situations.
\6\ Section 1a(12)(A)(x) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Act, however, gives the Commission discretion to expand the ECP
category as it deems appropriate. Specifically, Section 1a(12)(C)
provides that the list of entities defined as ECPs shall include ``any
other person that the Commission determines to be eligible in light of
the financial or other qualifications of the person.''
II. The Original NYMEX Petition
A. Introduction
By letter dated May 23, 2002, NYMEX submitted a petition seeking a
Commission interpretation pursuant to
[[Page 6631]]
Section 1a(12)(C) of the Act. Specifically, NYMEX, acting on behalf of
Exchange floor members and member clearing firms, requested that the
Commission make a determination pursuant to Section 1a(12)(C) of the
Act that floor members, when acting in a proprietary capacity, may
enter into certain specified OTC transactions in exempt commodities
pursuant to Section 2(h)(1) of the Act if such floor members have
obtained a financial guarantee for such transactions from an Exchange
clearing member that is registered with the Commission as an FCM.\7\
NYMEX suggested that the permissible OTC transactions be limited to
trading in a commodity that either (1) is listed only for clearing at
the Exchange,\8\ or (2) is listed for trading and clearing at the
Exchange and where Exchange rules provide for the exchange of futures
for swaps (``EFS'') in that contract.\9\ NYMEX further proposed that
such transactions would be subject to additional conditions and
restrictions detailed in the petition and described below.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ To qualify for the Section 2(h)(1) exemption, the
transaction must: (1) Be in an exempt commodity, (2) be entered into
by ECPs, and (3) not be entered into on a trading facility.
\8\ By letter dated May 24, 2002, NYMEX filed rule changes
implementing an initiative to provide clearing services for
specified energy contracts executed in the OTC markets. NYMEX
certified that the rules comply with the Act and the Commission's
regulations. Under the provision, NYMEX initially listed 25
contracts that are entered into OTC and accepted for clearing by
NYMEX, but are not listed for trading on the Exchange. In connection
with the NYMEX initiative, on May 30, 2002, the Commission issued an
order pursuant to Section 4d of the Act. The order provides that,
subject to certain terms and conditions, the NYMEX Clearinghouse and
FCMs clearing through the NYMEX Clearinghouse may commingle customer
funds used to margin, secure, or guarantee transactions in futures
contracts executed in the OTC markets and cleared by the NYMEX
Clearinghouse with other funds held in segregated accounts
maintained in accordance with Section 4d of the Act and Commission
Regulations thereunder.
\9\ EFS transactions are permitted at the Exchange pursuant to
NYMEX Rule 6.21A, ``Exchange of Futures for, or in Connection with,
Swap Transactions.'' The swap component of the transaction must
involve the commodity underlying a related NYMEX futures contract,
or a derivative, byproduct, or related product of such a commodity.
In furtherance of its effort to permit OTC clearing at the Exchange,
NYMEX amended the rule to include as eligible EFS transactions ``any
contract executed off the Exchange that the Exchange has designated
as eligible for clearing at the Exchange.'' The Division notes that,
subsequent to the Commission's ECP Order responding to the
Exchange's original petition, NYMEX listed on its ClearPort(sm)
Trading venue a significant number of futures contracts modeled
after OTC energy swap agreements. While these futures contracts are
competitively traded on the ClearPort(sm) Trading market, the vast
majority of positions in these contracts are established via EFS
transactions that are executed non-competitively away from the
Exchange and then submitted to NYMEX via its ClearPort(sm) Clearing
service.
\10\ NYMEX also suggested a further limitation on floor members'
permissible transactions by not permitting any OTC transactions in
electricity commodities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Arguments in Support of the Original Petition
In its original petition, NYMEX offered supporting arguments based
on both public interest considerations and a detailed analysis of the
Act's ECP definition. Those arguments are fully described in the
Federal Register notice implementing the original 2003 order.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 68 FR 5621 (February 4, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Trading Restrictions and Exchange Oversight
In its original petition, NYMEX represented that it would have
appropriate compliance systems in place to monitor OTC trading by
Exchange floor members.\12\ NYMEX also suggested that, consistent with
the standards already applicable to floor members with respect to their
trading on the Exchange, the Commission should provide that floor
members' transactions in the permissible contracts that are not
executed on a trading facility be executed only pursuant to the Section
2(h)(1) exemption. As indicated above, all Section 2(h)(1) transactions
would be subject to the Act's antimanipulation provisions and, in
certain situations, its antifraud provisions.\13\ Finally, the Exchange
represented that it would agree, as a condition for its members
participating in the OTC markets, to limit OTC trading by floor members
such that the counterparties to their trades must not be other floor
members for contracts that are listed for trading on the Exchange.
Thus, for example, floor members could not be counterparties in
connection with an OTC natural gas swap to be exchanged for a futures
position in the NYMEX Natural Gas Futures contract. NYMEX floor members
could be counterparties in connection with a Chicago Basis swap that is
subsequently cleared at NYMEX through EFS procedures because that
contract is listed only for clearing at the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Id.
\13\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. The Commission's Conclusion Regarding the Original Petition
After consideration of the original NYMEX petition, the Commission
determined that NYMEX floor members, subject to certain conditions and
for a two-year period commencing on the date of publication of the
order in the Federal Register, would be eligible to be ECPs as that
term is defined in Section 1a(12) of the Act.\14\ The floor members
were required to meet the financial qualifications of an ECP by having
a financial guarantee for the OTC transactions from a NYMEX clearing
member that is registered as an FCM and that meets certain minimum
working capital requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ A NYMEX floor member who is determined to be an ECP based
upon compliance with the provisions set forth in the Commission's
original order is an ECP only for the purpose of entering into
transactions executed pursuant to Section 2(h)(1) of the Act and as
described in the order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission noted that the execution and clearing of such
transactions has financial implications for the clearing system.\15\
Thus, the Commission added certain safeguards to the original order to
limit the possibility of a trader entering into OTC transactions that
could create financial difficulty for the guarantor FCM, the clearing
entity or other clearing firms. First, the guarantor FCM must clear, at
NYMEX, every OTC transaction for which it provides such a guarantee.
Second, in order to assure that the guarantor FCM is adequately
capitalized, the guarantor FCM must have and maintain at all times
minimum working capital \16\ of at least $20 million.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ The Commission noted that the guarantor FCM could restrict
or otherwise condition the trading for which the guarantee is
provided. The guarantor could, for instance, limit trading to
certain commodities, place financial limits on overall or daily
positions, or restrict trading by number or size of acceptable
transactions.
\16\ For the purposes of an FCM clearing member, NYMEX Rule 9.21
defines ``working capital'' to mean ``adjusted net capital'' as
defined by CFTC Regulation 1.17.
\17\ The original order provided a sliding scale for the two-
year duration of the original order whereby a clearing member was
required to have minimum working capital of $5 million during the
first 12 months, $10 million during the thirteenth through
eighteenth months, and $20 million thereafter. The final $20 million
requirement is carried over into this order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission determined to make the original order effective for
a two-year period in order to provide the opportunity to evaluate the
impact of the OTC trading on both the OTC market and on NYMEX. Thus,
the Commission required that NYMEX submit a report reviewing its
experiences and the experiences of its floor members and clearing
members with respect to OTC trading, including: The levels of OTC
trading and related clearing activity; the number of floor members and
clearing members who participated in these activities; and an
evaluation of whether the Commission should extend this Order and, if
so, whether any modifications should be made thereto. This report was
to address
[[Page 6632]]
the first eighteen months of the two-year period, and was to be
submitted to the Commission no later than 30 days after the conclusion
of that eighteen month period (i.e., by September 4, 2004). In fact,
the report was incorporated into the Exchange's January 19, 2005
petition to extend the relief granted in the original petition and thus
was not filed within the timeline set out in the original order.
Nevertheless, the Commission has determined to accept this report and
not to impose any sanctions on the Exchange for the late filing of the
report.
III. The Petition to Extend the Relief
A. The Exchange Report
The Exchange's petition to extend the relief granted in the
original order includes the required report concerning the experiences
of the Exchange, its floor members and clearing members under the
original order. At the outset, the report states that the Exchange
adopted two new rules in connection with the original order, Rules
6.21F (``Participation by NYMEX Floor Members in Special Program for
Over-the-Counter Trading with FCM Guarantee'') and Rule 9.41 (``Special
Capital Provisions for Clearing Members Guaranteeing and Clearing OTC
Contracts Executed by NYMEX Floor Members''). The Exchange notes that,
if the Commission grants its request for an extension, it will certify
to the Commission rule amendments to conform these rules to the terms
of the Commission's extension.
With respect to compliance oversight, the Exchange reports that,
under Rule 6.21F, floor members are required to notify the Exchange
Compliance Department prior to any participation in the program
authorized by the ECP Order, and to submit all executed OTC
transactions to the Exchange for clearing. Beginning April 1, 2004, the
Exchange also required that notification to include a specially
tailored guarantee form prepared by Exchange staff. In addition, the
Exchange employs a special trade type indicator to allow it to identify
EFS transactions. Thus, Exchange Compliance staff is able to identify
which floor members are participating in the program under the ECP
Order and whether they are complying with the notification and other
requirements. Currently, none of the floor members trading pursuant to
the ECP Order execute orders for customers in their floor member
capacities. Therefore, they would not be in a position to take
advantage of customer order information when trading in a proprietary
capacity under the ECP Order. In addition, the minimal amount of
trading done under the ECP Order has been regularly reviewed by the
Exchange's Compliance Market Surveillance staff. In addition,
Compliance Market Surveillance staff monitors for the condition of the
ECP Order that prohibits floor members participating in this program
from engaging in EFS transactions with each other. Compliance staff
monitors for compliance with this restriction by reviewing the trading
activity of participating floor members to check for trades involving a
CTI 1 vs. CTI 1 transaction.
With respect to actual floor member participation in the program,
the Exchange notes that it has been ``relatively slight to date.'' Only
12 floor members participated in the program overall and only seven
were participating at the time the extension request was filed. With
respect to volume, the Exchange reports that the floor members
participating in the program, during the period from March 11, 2003
through January 7, 2005, participated in cleared transactions totaling
82,855 lots on the buy side and 79,740 lots on the sell side. In
general, this EFS activity was concentrated in the smaller cash-settled
natural gas or natural gas basis futures contracts listed in the NYMEX
ClearPort(sm) Clearing System.
By comparison, the single day volume for November 4, 2004, the
busiest day experienced by NYMEX's ClearPort(sm) Clearing services
during that same period was 147,153 lots. The same press release
announcing that volume record noted that total 2004 cleared volume for
OTC transactions, as of that date, was 10,858,906 lots. Thus, the
contribution by floor members participating in the program under the
Commission's ECP Order ``has been relatively modest.''
The Exchange attributed this limited participation to a number of
possible factors. The Exchange noted that, over recent months,
noticeable price volatility in NYMEX's core floor-traded products has
provided ample trading opportunities on the Exchange's trading floors
in futures products, making it less necessary for professional futures
traders to look to OTC markets for trading opportunities. Also, at
present, the Exchange permits EFS transactions in natural gas futures,
but not crude oil, heating oil or unleaded gasoline futures, thus
making the program of interest primarily only to those floor members
who already regularly trade in natural gas futures. In addition, many
floor traders focus on trading in the front contract month, or the
first few listed months of a contract, whereas the OTC natural gas
market emphasizes longer trading periods, such as quarterly or seasonal
strip trading, so that a floor trader actively engaging in OTC natural
gas trading would likely need to retain an additional clerk to manage
the OTC activity. Finally, the requirement that the clearing FCM
guaranteeing a floor member's trades under the program must maintain
working capital of $20 million has restricted the number of clearing
members able to participate in the program and effectively narrowed the
pool of floor members willing to participate in the program, since it
is difficult (though not impossible) for a floor member to use his or
her regular clearing FCM for regular futures trading and another for
OTC trades under this program.
B. The Extension Request
The Exchange notes that its original petition, and the Commission's
original ECP Order, were based on an approach whereby an OTC energy
swap would be converted, via an EFS transaction, to a futures position
maintained at the Exchange's clearinghouse. Recently, however, the
Exchange has begun preparation of a draft filing to register with the
Commission a derivatives transaction execution facility (DTEF). As a
part of that filing, the Exchange plans to request that a large number
of the products currently listed on the NYMEX ClearPort(sm) Trading
product slate be shifted from the DCM to the DTEF regulatory tier. As
part of that same filing, the Exchange staff anticipates revisiting the
manner in which off-exchange energy transactions are submitted to the
Exchange for participation in the ClearPort(sm) Clearing Service. Any
such revision would require corresponding revisions in the Commission's
ECP Order. Therefore, the Exchange suggests that any substantive
changes to the terms of the order, including the possibility of making
the order permanent, should be considered in the context of the DTEF
filing. In the meantime, the Exchange requests that the existing ECP
Order be extended for an additional term of one year. The Exchange
notes that the policy arguments in favor of the program under the
original ECP Order, summarized in the Federal Register notice
publishing the order,\18\ ``remain valid and also support the
continuation of this program.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 68 FR 5621 (February 4, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Conclusion
Accordingly, the Commission has determined, consistent with the
NYMEX petition of January 19, 2005, that it is
[[Page 6633]]
appropriate to issue an order pursuant to Section 1a(12)(C) of the Act
extending the relief granted in its original February 4, 2003 order
whereby, subject to certain conditions and for a further one-year
period commencing on February 4, 2005, NYMEX floor brokers and floor
traders are included within the definition of ECPs who can enter into
OTC transactions pursuant to Section 2(h)(1) of the Act. Although this
order applies only to NYMEX and NYMEX members, the Commission would
welcome, in response to a petition so requesting, providing
substantially similar relief to other designated contract markets and
members of designated contract markets.
V. Cost Benefit Analysis
Section 15 of the Act, as amended by Section 119 of the CFMA,
requires the Commission to consider the costs and benefits of its
action before issuing a new regulation or order under the Act. By its
terms, Section 15 does not require the Commission to quantify the costs
and benefits of its action or to determine whether the benefits of the
action outweigh its costs. Rather, Section 15 simply requires the
Commission to ``consider the costs and benefits'' of the subject rule
or order.
Section 15(a) further specifies that the costs and benefits of the
proposed rule or order shall be evaluated in light of five broad areas
of market and public concern: (1) Protection of market participants and
the public; (2) efficiency, competitiveness, and financial integrity of
futures markets; (3) price discovery; (4) sound risk management
practices; and (5) other public interest considerations. The Commission
may, in its discretion, give greater weight to any one of the five
enumerated areas of concern and may, in its discretion, determine that,
notwithstanding its costs, a particular rule or order is necessary or
appropriate to protect the public interest or to effectuate any of the
provisions or to accomplish any of the purposes of the Act. The
Commission undertook a detailed costs-benefits analysis in considering
the original order.\19\ Actual experience under that order has been
consistent with the Commission's analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See 68 FR 5621 at 5624-25 (February 4, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By extending the essential provisions of the original 2003 order,
this order is intended to reduce regulatory barriers by continuing to
permit NYMEX members registered with the Commission as floor brokers or
floor traders, when acting in a proprietary capacity, to enter into OTC
transactions in exempt commodities pursuant to Section 2(h)(1) of the
Act if such floor members have obtained a financial guarantee for such
transactions from an Exchange clearing member that is registered with
the Commission as an FCM. The Commission has considered the costs and
benefits of this order in light of the specific provisions of Section
15(a) of the Act.
VI. Order
Upon due consideration, and pursuant to its authority under Section
1a(12)(C) of the Act, the Commission hereby determines that a NYMEX
member who is registered with the Commission as a floor broker or a
floor trader, when acting in a proprietary trading capacity, shall
continue to be deemed to be an eligible contract participant and may
continue to enter into Exchange-specified OTC contracts, agreements or
transactions in an exempt commodity under the following conditions:
1. This Order is effective for one year, commencing on February 4,
2005.
2. The contracts, agreements or transactions must be executed
pursuant to Section 2(h)(1) of the Act.
3. The floor broker or floor trader must have obtained a financial
guarantee for the contracts, agreements or transactions from a NYMEX
clearing member that:
(a) Is registered with the Commission as an FCM; and,
(b) Clears the OTC contracts, agreements or transactions thus
guaranteed.
4. Permissible contracts, agreements or transactions must be
limited to trading in a commodity that either:
(a) Is listed only for clearing at NYMEX or
(b) Is listed for trading and clearing at NYMEX and NYMEX's rules
provide for exchanges of futures for swaps in that contract, and each
OTC contract, agreement or transaction executed pursuant to the order
must be cleared at NYMEX.
5. The floor broker or floor trader may not enter into OTC
contracts, agreements or transactions with another floor broker or
floor trader as the counterparty for contracts that are listed for
trading on the Exchange.
6. NYMEX must have appropriate compliance systems in place to
monitor the OTC contracts, agreements or transactions of its floor
brokers and floor traders.
7. Clearing members that guarantee and clear OTC contracts,
agreements or transactions pursuant to this order must have and
maintain at all times minimum working capital of at least $20 million.
A clearing member must compute its working capital in accordance with
exchange rules and generally accepted accounting principles
consistently applied.
8. In the event NYMEX requests a further modification or extension
of the ECP Order, the request shall include a report to the Commission
reviewing the experiences of the Exchange and its floor members and
clearing members under the Order. The report shall include information
on the levels of OTC trading and related clearing activity, the number
of floor members and clearing members participating in the activity,
and the Exchange's reasons supporting the further modification or
extension of the Order.
This order is based upon the representations made and supporting
material provided to the Commission by NYMEX. Any material changes or
omissions in the facts and circumstances pursuant to which this order
is granted might require the Commission to reconsider its finding that
the provisions set forth herein are appropriate. Further, if experience
demonstrates that the continued effectiveness of this order would be
contrary to the public interest, the Commission may condition, modify,
suspend, terminate or otherwise restrict the provisions of this order,
as appropriate, on its own motion.
Issued in Washington, DC on February 2, 2005 by the Commission.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05-2368 Filed 2-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-U