Mirant settles price-reporting charges
Atlanta-based energy company Mirant has settled charges with the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) of false reporting of natural gas prices.
MAEM elected to settle with the CFTC to avoid the expense, distraction and risk of litigation and enable the company’s resources to remain fully focused on Chapter 11 emergence, said Doug Miller, Mirant’s general counsel.
Under the terms of the settlement, MAEM neither admitted nor denied the allegations that its employees reported false information in an attempt to manipulate pricing.
The false reports submitted by MAEM included false price, volume and/or counterparty information concerning natural gas cash transactions, as well as information concerning fictitious trades and/or trades observed in the market, alleged the CFTC. The information could have affected prices of New York Mercantile Exchange natural gas futures contracts, added the commission.
Price and volume information is used by price compilers to calculate published indexes of natural gas prices for various natural gas hubs throughout the US. The price compilers in this case were Gas Daily, Inside Ferc and Natural Gas Intelligence.
In 2002, Mirant had reviewed and amended its external reporting process following industry-wide natural gas reporting problems, said Miller. MAEM now requires all data provided to indexes to be validated and conveyed by risk management staff reporting to the company’s chief risk officer, rather than by MAEM personnel, he added.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
AI governance rules coming soon, says CFTC chair
Selig doesn’t want to stifle innovation, but says trading or advice algos will need guardrails
For Esma the supervisor, people power will be prime
Industry hopes to avoid people risk during transition, with help from national authorities
Basel III endgame: overall relief hides winners and losers
G-Sibs gain from surcharge reform while AOCI hits regional banks
One thing missing from US Basel III proposal: a deadline
Without a deadline, risk teams will struggle to secure resources to begin implementation projects
In simplifying credit risk models, EBA could compound capital costs
Skipping hard yards of internal ratings-based approach might trip higher capital charges and implementation costs
Change fatigue could dim EBA’s credit risk simplicity drive
Revisions may be kept to a minimum as short-term implementation burden weighs on banks
Foreign banks can swerve US Basel op risk capital charges
New proposal offers category III and IV banks op-out from regime, but intragroup trades penalised
BoE’s Bailey expects global consensus on FRTB internal models
Isda AGM: UK is reviewing proposals from US and EU regulators before finalising its IMA rules