Notice of Intent, Pursuant to the Authority in Section 2(h)(7) of the Commodity Exchange Act and Commission Rule 36.3(c)(3), To Undertake a Determination Whether the AECO Financial Basis Contract, Offered for Trading on the Intercontinental Exchange, Inc., Performs a Significant Price Discovery Function, 52196-52198 [E9-24381]

Download as PDF 52196 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 195 / Friday, October 9, 2009 / Notices Gas End of Day’’ data packages with access to all price data or just 12, 24, 36, or 48 months of historical data. III. Request for Comment In evaluating whether an ECM’s agreement, contract, or transaction performs a significant price discovery function, section 2(h)(7) of the CEA directs the Commission to consider, as appropriate, four specific criteria: price linkage, arbitrage, material price reference, and material liquidity. As it explained in Appendix A to the part 36 rules,5 the Commission, in making SPDC determinations, will apply and weigh each factor, as appropriate, to the specific contract and circumstances under consideration. As part of its evaluation, the Commission will consider the written data, views, and arguments from any ECM that lists the potential SPDC and from any other interested parties. Accordingly, the Commission requests comment on whether the ICE’s PER contract performs a significant price discovery function. Commenters’ attention is directed particularly to Appendix A of the Commission’s part 36 rules for a detailed discussion of the factors relevant to a SPDC determination. The Commission notes that comments which analyze the contract in terms of these factors will be especially helpful to the determination process. In order to determine the relevance of comments received, the Commission requests that commenters explain in what capacity are they knowledgeable about the subject contract. IV. Related Matters mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES A. Paperwork Reduction Act The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (‘‘PRA’’) 6 imposes certain requirements on Federal agencies, including the Commission, in connection with their conducting or sponsoring any collection of information, as defined by the PRA. Certain provisions of final Commission rule 36.3 impose new regulatory and reporting requirements on ECMs, resulting in information collection requirements within the meaning of the PRA; OMB previously has approved and assigned OMB control number 3038– 0060 to this collection of information. B. Cost-Benefit Analysis Section 15(a) of the CEA 7 requires the Commission to consider the costs and benefits of its actions before issuing an order under the Act. By its terms, 5 17 CFR 36, Appendix A. U.S.C. 3507(d). 7 7 U.S.C. 19(a). 16:05 Oct 08, 2009 Issued in Washington, DC, on October 5, 2009 by the Commission. David A. Stawick, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. E9–24383 Filed 10–8–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351–01–P COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Jkt 220001 SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (‘‘CFTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) is undertaking a review to determine whether the AECO Financial Basis (‘‘AEC’’) contract, offered for trading on the IntercontinentalExchange, Inc. (‘‘ICE’’), an exempt commercial market (‘‘ECM’’) under Sections 2(h)(3)–(5) of the Commodity Exchange Act (‘‘CEA’’ or the ‘‘Act’’), performs a significant price discovery function. Authority for this action is found in section 2(h)(7) of the CEA and Commission rule 36.3(c) promulgated thereunder. In connection with this evaluation, the Commission invites comment from interested parties. DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 26, 2009. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: • Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. • E-mail: secretary@cftc.gov. Include AECO Financial Basis Contract (AEC) in the subject line of the message. • Fax: (202) 418–5521. • Mail: Send to David A. Stawick, Secretary, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 20581. • Courier: Same as mail above. All comments received will be posted without change to https:// www.CFTC.gov/. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory K. Price, Industry Economist, Division of Market Oversight, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 20581. Telephone: (202) 418–5515. Email: gprice@cftc.gov; or Susan Nathan, Senior Special Counsel, Division of Market Oversight, same address. Telephone: (202) 418–5133. E-mail: snathan@cftc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of Intent, Pursuant to the Authority in Section 2(h)(7) of the Commodity Exchange Act and Commission Rule 36.3(c)(3), To Undertake a Determination Whether the AECO Financial Basis Contract, Offered for Trading on the Intercontinental Exchange, Inc., Performs a Significant Price Discovery Function AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission. ACTION: Notice of action and request for comment. 6 44 VerDate Nov<24>2008 section 15(a) does not require the Commission to quantify the costs and benefits of such an order or to determine whether the benefits of such an order outweigh its costs; rather, it requires that the Commission ‘‘consider’’ the costs and benefits of its action. Section 15(a) further specifies that the costs and benefits 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 bulk of the costs imposed by the requirements of Commission Rule 36.3 relate to significant and increased information-submission and reporting requirements adopted in response to the Reauthorization Act’s directive that the Commission take an active role in determining whether contracts listed by ECMs qualify as SPDCs. The enhanced requirements for ECMs will permit the Commission to acquire the information it needs to discharge its newlymandated responsibilities and to ensure that ECMs with SPDCs are identified as entities with the elevated status of registered entity under the CEA and are in compliance with the statutory terms of the core principles of section 2(h)(7)(C) of the Act. The primary benefit to the public is to enable the Commission to discharge its statutory obligation to monitor for the presence of SPDCs and extend its oversight to the trading of SPDCs. PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 I. Introduction On March 16, 2009, the CFTC promulgated final rules implementing provisions of the CFTC Reauthorization Act of 2008 (‘‘Reauthorization Act’’) 1 which subjects ECMs with significant price discovery contracts (‘‘SPDCs’’) to self-regulatory and reporting requirements, as well as certain Commission oversight authorities, with respect to those contracts. Among other things, these rules and rule amendments 1 74 FR 12178 (Mar. 23, 2009); these rules became effective on April 22, 2009. E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 195 / Friday, October 9, 2009 / Notices revise the information-submission requirements applicable to ECMs, establish procedures and standards by which the Commission will determine whether an ECM contract performs a significant price discovery function, and provide guidance with respect to compliance with nine statutory core principles applicable to ECMs with SPDCs. These rules became effective on April 22, 2009. In determining whether an ECM’s contract is or is not a SPDC, the Commission will evaluate the contract’s material liquidity, price linkage to other contracts, potential for arbitrage with other contracts traded on designated contract markets or derivatives transaction execution facilities, use of the ECM contract’s prices to execute or settle other transactions, and other factors. In order to facilitate the Commission’s identification of possible SPDCs, Commission rule 36.3(c)(2) requires that an ECM operating in reliance on section 2(h)(3) promptly notify the Commission and provide supporting information or data concerning any contract: (i) That averaged five trades per day or more over the most recent calendar quarter; and (ii) (A) for which the ECM sells price information regarding the contract to market participants or industry publications; or (B) whose daily closing or settlement prices on 95 percent or more of the days in the most recent quarter were within 2.5 percent of the contemporaneously determined closing, settlement, or other daily price of another agreement. mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES II. Determination of a SPDC A. The SPDC Determination Process Commission rule 36.3(c)(3) establishes the procedures by which the Commission makes and announces its determination on whether a specific ECM contract serves a significant price discovery function. Under those procedures, the Commission will publish a notice in the Federal Register that it intends to undertake a determination as to whether the specified agreement, contract, or transaction performs a significant price discovery function and to receive written data, views, and arguments relevant to its determination from the ECM and other interested persons.2 After prompt consideration of all relevant information,3 the Commission 2 The Commission may commence this process on its own initiative or on the basis of information provided to it by an ECM pursuant to the notification provisions of Commission rule 36.3(c)(2). 3 Where appropriate, the Commission may choose to interview market participants regarding their VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:05 Oct 08, 2009 Jkt 220001 will, within a reasonable period of time after the close of the comment period, issue an order explaining its determination. Following the issuance of an order by the Commission that the ECM executes or trades an agreement, contract, or transaction that performs a significant price discovery function, the ECM must demonstrate, with respect to that agreement, contract, or transaction, compliance with the core principles under section 2(h)(7)(C) of the CEA 4 and the applicable provisions of Part 36. If the Commission’s order represents the first time it has determined that one of the ECM’s contracts performs a significant price discovery function, the ECM must submit a written demonstration of its compliance with the core principles within 90 calendar days of the date of the Commission’s order. For each subsequent determination by the Commission that the ECM has an additional SPDC, the ECM must submit a written demonstration of its compliance with the core principles within 30 calendar days of the Commission’s order. B. AECO Financial Basis Contract The AEC contract is cash settled based on the difference between the AECO–C & Nova Inventory Transfer (Alberta) price index for natural gas in the month of production, as reported in the first publication of the month of Canadian Enerdata, Ltd.’s Canadian Gas Price Reporter and the final settlement price of the NYMEX Henry Hub physically-delivered natural gas futures contract for the same calendar month. The Alberta natural gas market is a major connection point for longdistance transmission systems that take natural gas to points throughout Canada and the United States. The transactions used to calculate the monthly Alberta price index are those that are conducted on the Natural Gas Exchange (‘‘NGX’’) in a given month and specify the delivery of natural gas at the Alberta hub in the following month. The price index is computed as the volumeweighted average of the applicable natural gas transactions. The size of the AEC contract is 2,500 million British thermal units (‘‘mmBtu’’), and the unit of trading is any multiple of 2,500 mmBtu. The AEC contract is listed for impressions of a particular contract. Further, while they may not provide direct evidentiary support with respect to a particular contract, the Commission may rely for background and context on resources such as its October 2007 Report on the Oversight of Trading on Regulated Futures Exchanges and Exempt Commercial Markets (‘‘ECM Study’’). https://www.cftc.gov/stellent/groups/ public/@newsroom/documents/file/pr5403– 07_ecmreport.pdf. 4 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(C). PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 52197 up to 120 calendar months commencing with the next calendar month. Based upon a required quarterly notification filed on July 27, 2009 (mandatory under Rule 36.3(c)(2)), the ICE reported that, with respect to its AEC contract, the total number of trades was 7,263 in the second quarter of 2009, resulting in a daily average of 113.5 trades. During the same period, the AEC contract had a total trading volume of 806,438 contracts and an average daily trading volume of 12,601 contracts. Moreover, the open interest as of June 30, 2009, was 443,402 contracts. It appears that the AEC contract may satisfy the material liquidity, price linkage, and material price reference factors for SPDC determination. With respect to material liquidity, trading in the AEC contract averaged more than 12,000 contracts on a daily basis, with more than 100 separate transactions each day. In addition, the open interest in the subject contract was substantial. In regard to price linkage, the final settlement of the AEC contract is based, in part, on the final settlement price of the NYMEX’s physically-delivered natural gas contract, where the NYMEX is registered with the Commission as a designated contract market (‘‘DCM’’). In terms of material price reference, the ICE maintains exclusive rights over NGX’s Alberta natural gas price index. As a result, no other exchange can offer such a basis contract based on NGX’s Alberta index price. While other thirdparty price providers produce natural gas price indices for a variety of trading centers, those indices may not be the same in value or quality as NGX’s price indices. In addition, the ICE sells its price data to market participants in a number of different packages which vary in terms of the hubs covered, time periods, and whether the data are daily only or historical. For example, the ICE offers ‘‘West Gas End of Day’’ and ‘‘OTC Gas End of Day’’ data packages with access to all price data or just 12, 24, 36, or 48 months of historical data. III. Request for Comment In evaluating whether an ECM’s agreement, contract, or transaction performs a significant price discovery function, section 2(h)(7) of the CEA directs the Commission to consider, as appropriate, four specific criteria: price linkage, arbitrage, material price reference, and material liquidity. As it explained in Appendix A to the Part 36 rules,5 the Commission, in making SPDC determinations, will apply and weigh each factor, as appropriate, to the 5 17 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM CFR 36, Appendix A. 09OCN1 52198 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 195 / Friday, October 9, 2009 / Notices specific contract and circumstances under consideration. As part of its evaluation, the Commission will consider the written data, views, and arguments from any ECM that lists the potential SPDC and from any other interested parties. Accordingly, the Commission requests comment on whether the ICE’s AEC contract performs a significant price discovery function. Commenters’ attention is directed particularly to Appendix A of the Commission’s Part 36 rules for a detailed discussion of the factors relevant to a SPDC determination. The Commission notes that comments which analyze the contract in terms of these factors will be especially helpful to the determination process. In order to determine the relevance of comments received, the Commission requests that commenters explain in what capacity are they knowledgeable about the subject contract. IV. Related Matters A. Paperwork Reduction Act The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (‘‘PRA’’) 6 imposes certain requirements on federal agencies, including the Commission, in connection with their conducting or sponsoring any collection of information, as defined by the PRA. Certain provisions of final Commission rule 36.3 impose new regulatory and reporting requirements on ECMs, resulting in information collection requirements within the meaning of the PRA; OMB previously has approved and assigned OMB control number 3038– 0060 to this collection of information. mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES B. Cost-Benefit Analysis Section 15(a) of the CEA 7 requires the Commission to consider the costs and benefits of its actions before issuing an order under the Act. By its terms, section 15(a) does not require the Commission to quantify the costs and benefits of such an order or to determine whether the benefits of such an order outweigh its costs; rather, it requires that the Commission ‘‘consider’’ the costs and benefits of its action. Section 15(a) further specifies that the costs and benefits 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. 6 44 77 U.S.C. 3507(d). U.S.C. 19(a). VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:05 Oct 08, 2009 Jkt 220001 The bulk of the costs imposed by the requirements of Commission Rule 36.3 relate to significant and increased information-submission and reporting requirements adopted in response to the Reauthorization Act’s directive that the Commission take an active role in determining whether contracts listed by ECMs qualify as SPDCs. The enhanced requirements for ECMs will permit the Commission to acquire the information it needs to discharge its newlymandated responsibilities and to ensure that ECMs with SPDCs are identified as entities with the elevated status of registered entity under the CEA and are in compliance with the statutory terms of the core principles of section 2(h)(7)(C) of the Act. The primary benefit to the public is to enable the Commission to discharge its statutory obligation to monitor for the presence of SPDCs and extend its oversight to the trading of SPDCs. Issued in Washington, DC, on October 5, 2009 by the Commission. David A. Stawick, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. E9–24381 Filed 10–8–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351–01–P COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Notice of Intent, Pursuant to the Authority in Section 2(h)(7) of the Commodity Exchange Act and Commission Rule 36.3(c)(3), To Undertake a Determination Whether the Chicago Financial Basis Contract, Offered for Trading on the IntercontinentalExchange, Inc., Performs a Significant Price Discovery Function AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission. ACTION: Notice of action and request for comment. SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (‘‘CFTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) is undertaking a review to determine whether the Chicago Financial Basis (‘‘DGD’’) contract, offered for trading on the IntercontinentalExchange, Inc. (‘‘ICE’’), an exempt commercial market (‘‘ECM’’) under Sections 2(h)(3)–(5) of the Commodity Exchange Act (‘‘CEA’’ or the ‘‘Act’’), performs a significant price discovery function. Authority for this action is found in section 2(h)(7) of the CEA and Commission rule 36.3(c) promulgated thereunder. In connection with this evaluation, the Commission invites comment from interested parties. PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 26, 2009. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: • Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. • E-mail: secretary@cftc.gov. Include Chicago Financial Basis (DGD) Contract in the subject line of the message. • Fax: (202) 418–5521. • Mail: Send to David A. Stawick, Secretary, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 20581. • Courier: Same as mail above. All comments received will be posted without change to https:// www.CFTC.gov/. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory K. Price, Industry Economist, Division of Market Oversight, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 20581. Telephone: (202) 418–5515. Email: gprice@cftc.gov; or Susan Nathan, Senior Special Counsel, Division of Market Oversight, same address. Telephone: (202) 418–5133. E-mail: snathan@cftc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction On March 16, 2009, the CFTC promulgated final rules implementing provisions of the CFTC Reauthorization Act of 2008 (‘‘Reauthorization Act’’) 1 which subjects ECMs with significant price discovery contracts (‘‘SPDCs’’) to self-regulatory and reporting requirements, as well as certain Commission oversight authorities, with respect to those contracts. Among other things, these rules and rule amendments revise the information-submission requirements applicable to ECMs, establish procedures and standards by which the Commission will determine whether an ECM contract performs a significant price discovery function, and provide guidance with respect to compliance with nine statutory core principles applicable to ECMs with SPDCs. These rules became effective on April 22, 2009. In determining whether an ECM’s contract is or is not a SPDC, the Commission will evaluate the contract’s material liquidity, price linkage to other contracts, potential for arbitrage with other contracts traded on designated 1 74 FR 12178 (Mar. 23, 2009); these rules became effective on April 22, 2009. E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 195 (Friday, October 9, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52196-52198]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24381]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Notice of Intent, Pursuant to the Authority in Section 2(h)(7) of 
the Commodity Exchange Act and Commission Rule 36.3(c)(3), To Undertake 
a Determination Whether the AECO Financial Basis Contract, Offered for 
Trading on the Intercontinental Exchange, Inc., Performs a Significant 
Price Discovery Function

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

ACTION: Notice of action and request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (``CFTC'' or 
``Commission'') is undertaking a review to determine whether the AECO 
Financial Basis (``AEC'') contract, offered for trading on the 
IntercontinentalExchange, Inc. (``ICE''), an exempt commercial market 
(``ECM'') under Sections 2(h)(3)-(5) of the Commodity Exchange Act 
(``CEA'' or the ``Act''), performs a significant price discovery 
function. Authority for this action is found in section 2(h)(7) of the 
CEA and Commission rule 36.3(c) promulgated thereunder. In connection 
with this evaluation, the Commission invites comment from interested 
parties.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 26, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Federal 
eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
     E-mail: secretary@cftc.gov. Include AECO Financial Basis 
Contract (AEC) in the subject line of the message.
     Fax: (202) 418-5521.
     Mail: Send to David A. Stawick, Secretary, Commodity 
Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, 
NW., Washington, DC 20581.
     Courier: Same as mail above.
    All comments received will be posted without change to https://www.CFTC.gov/.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory K. Price, Industry Economist, 
Division of Market Oversight, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 
Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 20581. 
Telephone: (202) 418-5515. E-mail: gprice@cftc.gov; or Susan Nathan, 
Senior Special Counsel, Division of Market Oversight, same address. 
Telephone: (202) 418-5133. E-mail: snathan@cftc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    On March 16, 2009, the CFTC promulgated final rules implementing 
provisions of the CFTC Reauthorization Act of 2008 (``Reauthorization 
Act'') \1\ which subjects ECMs with significant price discovery 
contracts (``SPDCs'') to self-regulatory and reporting requirements, as 
well as certain Commission oversight authorities, with respect to those 
contracts. Among other things, these rules and rule amendments

[[Page 52197]]

revise the information-submission requirements applicable to ECMs, 
establish procedures and standards by which the Commission will 
determine whether an ECM contract performs a significant price 
discovery function, and provide guidance with respect to compliance 
with nine statutory core principles applicable to ECMs with SPDCs. 
These rules became effective on April 22, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 74 FR 12178 (Mar. 23, 2009); these rules became effective on 
April 22, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether an ECM's contract is or is not a SPDC, the 
Commission will evaluate the contract's material liquidity, price 
linkage to other contracts, potential for arbitrage with other 
contracts traded on designated contract markets or derivatives 
transaction execution facilities, use of the ECM contract's prices to 
execute or settle other transactions, and other factors.
    In order to facilitate the Commission's identification of possible 
SPDCs, Commission rule 36.3(c)(2) requires that an ECM operating in 
reliance on section 2(h)(3) promptly notify the Commission and provide 
supporting information or data concerning any contract: (i) That 
averaged five trades per day or more over the most recent calendar 
quarter; and (ii) (A) for which the ECM sells price information 
regarding the contract to market participants or industry publications; 
or (B) whose daily closing or settlement prices on 95 percent or more 
of the days in the most recent quarter were within 2.5 percent of the 
contemporaneously determined closing, settlement, or other daily price 
of another agreement.

II. Determination of a SPDC

A. The SPDC Determination Process

    Commission rule 36.3(c)(3) establishes the procedures by which the 
Commission makes and announces its determination on whether a specific 
ECM contract serves a significant price discovery function. Under those 
procedures, the Commission will publish a notice in the Federal 
Register that it intends to undertake a determination as to whether the 
specified agreement, contract, or transaction performs a significant 
price discovery function and to receive written data, views, and 
arguments relevant to its determination from the ECM and other 
interested persons.\2\ After prompt consideration of all relevant 
information,\3\ the Commission will, within a reasonable period of time 
after the close of the comment period, issue an order explaining its 
determination. Following the issuance of an order by the Commission 
that the ECM executes or trades an agreement, contract, or transaction 
that performs a significant price discovery function, the ECM must 
demonstrate, with respect to that agreement, contract, or transaction, 
compliance with the core principles under section 2(h)(7)(C) of the CEA 
\4\ and the applicable provisions of Part 36. If the Commission's order 
represents the first time it has determined that one of the ECM's 
contracts performs a significant price discovery function, the ECM must 
submit a written demonstration of its compliance with the core 
principles within 90 calendar days of the date of the Commission's 
order. For each subsequent determination by the Commission that the ECM 
has an additional SPDC, the ECM must submit a written demonstration of 
its compliance with the core principles within 30 calendar days of the 
Commission's order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission may commence this process on its own 
initiative or on the basis of information provided to it by an ECM 
pursuant to the notification provisions of Commission rule 
36.3(c)(2).
    \3\ Where appropriate, the Commission may choose to interview 
market participants regarding their impressions of a particular 
contract. Further, while they may not provide direct evidentiary 
support with respect to a particular contract, the Commission may 
rely for background and context on resources such as its October 
2007 Report on the Oversight of Trading on Regulated Futures 
Exchanges and Exempt Commercial Markets (``ECM Study''). https://www.cftc.gov/stellent/groups/public/@newsroom/documents/file/pr5403-07_ecmreport.pdf.
    \4\ 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. AECO Financial Basis Contract

    The AEC contract is cash settled based on the difference between 
the AECO-C & Nova Inventory Transfer (Alberta) price index for natural 
gas in the month of production, as reported in the first publication of 
the month of Canadian Enerdata, Ltd.'s Canadian Gas Price Reporter and 
the final settlement price of the NYMEX Henry Hub physically-delivered 
natural gas futures contract for the same calendar month. The Alberta 
natural gas market is a major connection point for long-distance 
transmission systems that take natural gas to points throughout Canada 
and the United States. The transactions used to calculate the monthly 
Alberta price index are those that are conducted on the Natural Gas 
Exchange (``NGX'') in a given month and specify the delivery of natural 
gas at the Alberta hub in the following month. The price index is 
computed as the volume-weighted average of the applicable natural gas 
transactions. The size of the AEC contract is 2,500 million British 
thermal units (``mmBtu''), and the unit of trading is any multiple of 
2,500 mmBtu. The AEC contract is listed for up to 120 calendar months 
commencing with the next calendar month.
    Based upon a required quarterly notification filed on July 27, 2009 
(mandatory under Rule 36.3(c)(2)), the ICE reported that, with respect 
to its AEC contract, the total number of trades was 7,263 in the second 
quarter of 2009, resulting in a daily average of 113.5 trades. During 
the same period, the AEC contract had a total trading volume of 806,438 
contracts and an average daily trading volume of 12,601 contracts. 
Moreover, the open interest as of June 30, 2009, was 443,402 contracts.
    It appears that the AEC contract may satisfy the material 
liquidity, price linkage, and material price reference factors for SPDC 
determination. With respect to material liquidity, trading in the AEC 
contract averaged more than 12,000 contracts on a daily basis, with 
more than 100 separate transactions each day. In addition, the open 
interest in the subject contract was substantial. In regard to price 
linkage, the final settlement of the AEC contract is based, in part, on 
the final settlement price of the NYMEX's physically-delivered natural 
gas contract, where the NYMEX is registered with the Commission as a 
designated contract market (``DCM''). In terms of material price 
reference, the ICE maintains exclusive rights over NGX's Alberta 
natural gas price index. As a result, no other exchange can offer such 
a basis contract based on NGX's Alberta index price. While other third-
party price providers produce natural gas price indices for a variety 
of trading centers, those indices may not be the same in value or 
quality as NGX's price indices. In addition, the ICE sells its price 
data to market participants in a number of different packages which 
vary in terms of the hubs covered, time periods, and whether the data 
are daily only or historical. For example, the ICE offers ``West Gas 
End of Day'' and ``OTC Gas End of Day'' data packages with access to 
all price data or just 12, 24, 36, or 48 months of historical data.

III. Request for Comment

    In evaluating whether an ECM's agreement, contract, or transaction 
performs a significant price discovery function, section 2(h)(7) of the 
CEA directs the Commission to consider, as appropriate, four specific 
criteria: price linkage, arbitrage, material price reference, and 
material liquidity. As it explained in Appendix A to the Part 36 
rules,\5\ the Commission, in making SPDC determinations, will apply and 
weigh each factor, as appropriate, to the

[[Page 52198]]

specific contract and circumstances under consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 36, Appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of its evaluation, the Commission will consider the written 
data, views, and arguments from any ECM that lists the potential SPDC 
and from any other interested parties. Accordingly, the Commission 
requests comment on whether the ICE's AEC contract performs a 
significant price discovery function. Commenters' attention is directed 
particularly to Appendix A of the Commission's Part 36 rules for a 
detailed discussion of the factors relevant to a SPDC determination. 
The Commission notes that comments which analyze the contract in terms 
of these factors will be especially helpful to the determination 
process. In order to determine the relevance of comments received, the 
Commission requests that commenters explain in what capacity are they 
knowledgeable about the subject contract.

IV. Related Matters

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (``PRA'') \6\ imposes certain 
requirements on federal agencies, including the Commission, in 
connection with their conducting or sponsoring any collection of 
information, as defined by the PRA. Certain provisions of final 
Commission rule 36.3 impose new regulatory and reporting requirements 
on ECMs, resulting in information collection requirements within the 
meaning of the PRA; OMB previously has approved and assigned OMB 
control number 3038-0060 to this collection of information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Cost-Benefit Analysis

    Section 15(a) of the CEA \7\ requires the Commission to consider 
the costs and benefits of its actions before issuing an order under the 
Act. By its terms, section 15(a) does not require the Commission to 
quantify the costs and benefits of such an order or to determine 
whether the benefits of such an order outweigh its costs; rather, it 
requires that the Commission ``consider'' the costs and benefits of its 
action. Section 15(a) further specifies that the costs and benefits 
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 7 U.S.C. 19(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The bulk of the costs imposed by the requirements of Commission 
Rule 36.3 relate to significant and increased information-submission 
and reporting requirements adopted in response to the Reauthorization 
Act's directive that the Commission take an active role in determining 
whether contracts listed by ECMs qualify as SPDCs. The enhanced 
requirements for ECMs will permit the Commission to acquire the 
information it needs to discharge its newly-mandated responsibilities 
and to ensure that ECMs with SPDCs are identified as entities with the 
elevated status of registered entity under the CEA and are in 
compliance with the statutory terms of the core principles of section 
2(h)(7)(C) of the Act. The primary benefit to the public is to enable 
the Commission to discharge its statutory obligation to monitor for the 
presence of SPDCs and extend its oversight to the trading of SPDCs.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 5, 2009 by the Commission.
David A. Stawick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-24381 Filed 10-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.