Financial Derivatives Transactions To Offset Interest Rate Risk; Investment and Deposit Activities, 37030-37034 [2011-15738]
Download as PDF
37030
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Federal Housing Finance Agency,
Fourth Floor, 1700 G Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20552. The telephone
number for the Telecommunications
Device for the Hearing Impaired is (800)
877–8339.
FCA: William G. Dunn, Acting
Associate Director, Finance and Capital
Markets Team, Office of Regulatory
Policy, Farm Credit Administration,
McLean, VA 22102–5090, (703) 883–
4414, TTY (703) 883–4434, Joseph T.
Connor, Associate Director for Policy
and Analysis, Office of Secondary
Market Oversight, Farm Credit
Administration, McLean, VA 22102–
5090, (703) 883–4280, TTY (703) 883–
4434, or Rebecca S. Orlich, Senior
Counsel, Office of General Counsel,
Farm Credit Administration, McLean,
VA 22102–5090, (703) 883–4020, TTY
(703) 883–4020.
On May
11, 2011, the proposed rule was
published in the Federal Register.1 The
proposed rule would establish
minimum margin and capital
requirements for registered swap
dealers, major swap participants,
security-based swap dealers, and major
security-based swap participants for
which one of the Agencies is the
prudential regulator, as required under
sections 731 and 764 of the Dodd-Frank
Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act (the Dodd-Frank Act).2
Sections 731 and 764 of the Dodd-Frank
Act add a new section 4s to the
Commodity Exchange Act and a new
section 15F to the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, respectively, which require
the registration and regulation of swap
dealers and major swap participants and
security-based swap dealers and major
security-based swap participants
(collectively, swap entities). For certain
types of swap entities that are
prudentially regulated by one of the
Agencies, sections 731 and 764 of the
Dodd-Frank Act require the Agencies to
adopt rules jointly for swap entities
under their respective jurisdictions
imposing (i) capital requirements and
(ii) initial and variation margin
requirements on all non-cleared swaps
and non-cleared security-based swaps.
In recognition of the complexities of the
rulemaking and the variety of
considerations involved in its impact
and implementation, the Agencies
requested that commenters respond to
numerous questions. The proposed rule
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
stated that the public comment period
would close on June 24, 2011.3
The Agencies have received requests
from the public for an extension of the
comment period.4 The Agencies believe
that it is important to allow parties more
time to consider the impact of the
proposed rule, and to extend the
comment period on the proposed rule so
that it will run concurrently with the
comment period for similar margin and
capital requirements proposed by the
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.5 Therefore, the Agencies
are extending the deadline for
submitting comments on the proposed
rule from June 24, 2011 to July 11, 2011.
Dated: June 21, 2011.
Julie L. Williams,
First Senior Deputy Comptroller and Chief
Counsel.
By order of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, acting through the
Secretary under delegated authority, June 22,
2011.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Secretary of the Board.
Dated at Washington, DC, this 21 of June
2011.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
Dale L. Aultman
Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.
Dated: June 21, 2011.
Stephen M. Cross,
Deputy Director of the Division of Bank
Regulation.
By delegation,
Federal Housing Finance Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011–16004 Filed 6–23–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714–01–8070–01–6705–01–6210–01–
4810–33–P
I. Background
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION
ADMINISTRATION
12 CFR Part 703
Financial Derivatives Transactions To
Offset Interest Rate Risk; Investment
and Deposit Activities
National Credit Union
Administration.
ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking.
AGENCY:
Through this Advance Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (‘‘ANPR’’), the
National Credit Union Administration
SUMMARY:
3 See
1 See
76 FR 27564.
2 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act, Public Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376
(2010).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:44 Jun 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
(‘‘NCUA’’) requests public comments on
whether and how to modify its rule on
investment and deposit activities to
permit a natural person credit union to
engage in the purchase and sale of
financial derivatives for the purpose of
offsetting interest rate risk. Although
permitted by law, NCUA currently
allows only a limited number of credit
unions, on a case-by-case basis, to
engage in such transactions under an
investment pilot program.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 23, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any one of the following methods
(Please send comments by one method
only):
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• NCUA Web Site: thttps://
www.ncua.gov/
RegulationsOpinionsLaws/proposed_
regs/proposed_regs.html. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail: Address to
regcomments@ncua.gov. Include ‘‘[Your
name] Comments on Part 703 ANPR,
Financial Derivatives Transactions to
Offset Interest Rate Risk’’ in the e-mail
subject line.
• Fax: (703) 518–6319. Use the
subject line described above for e-mail.
• Mail: Address to Mary Rupp,
Secretary of the Board, National Credit
Union Administration, 1775 Duke
Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314–
3428.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as
mail address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeremy Taylor, Senior Capital Market
Specialist, telephone: 703/518–6628.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
id.
comment letter to the OCC, Board, and FDIC
from American Bankers Association et al. (June 17,
2011).
5 See 76 FR 23732; 76 FR 27621.
4 See
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
A. Financial Derivatives Transactions.
A financial ‘‘derivative’’ is a financial
contract, the value of which is derived
from the performance of an underlying
asset or market index. An interest rate
‘‘swap,’’ for example, may be tied to
short-term ‘‘LIBOR rates’’, which are
variable, and long-term ‘‘swap rates,’’
which are fixed. The parties to an
interest rate ‘‘swap’’ transaction can
agree to exchange fixed cash flows for
variable cash flows. The purpose may be
either speculative or to reduce risk.
A credit union may enter into a
derivatives transaction to protect itself
against interest rate risk. For example, a
credit union that has invested its
deposits in a portfolio of mortgages that
pays a fixed rate of interest is exposed
to risk of an upward movement in
interest rates. On members’ variable rate
E:\FR\FM\24JNP1.SGM
24JNP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2011 / Proposed Rules
deposits, the credit union will be forced
to increase the rates it pays in order to
stay competitive, while the cash flows
received from its portfolio of fixed-rate
mortgages remains static. As interest
rates rise, the credit union’s net interest
margin shrinks, and the value of the
mortgages diminishes.
To offset the impact of rising interest
rates, a credit union could enter into an
interest rate ‘‘swap’’ in which it
exchanges with a counterparty the
fixed-rate cash flows it receives from its
mortgages for variable-rate cash flows
that fluctuate with the yield it must pay
on members’ deposits. As a result, the
credit union’s cost of funds remains the
same regardless of interest rate
movements.
Alternatively, a credit union could
purchase an interest rate ‘‘cap’’ that
would effectively fix the cost of funds
at a pre-agreed ceiling. For a premium
paid by the credit union, the
counterparty agrees to make payments
to the credit union when the referenced
variable market rate exceeds the
contractual ceiling rate. This payment
would occur at the end of each period
in which a referenced rate, like LIBOR,
exceeds the agreed ceiling rate. The
interest rate ‘‘cap’’ acts as insurance
against rising interest rates since the
credit union’s cost of funds on the
amount hedged will be offset by
counterparty’s payments in excess of the
interest rate ceiling. The counterparty
thus absorbs the risk of significant
interest rate increases above the
contractual ceiling rate.
B. Authority To Invest in Financial
Derivatives. The purchase and sale of
financial derivatives, provided it is for
the purpose of offsetting interest rate
risk (‘‘IRR’’), is recognized as an
‘‘incidental power’’ granted by the
Federal Credit Union Act (‘‘the Act’’) to
enable a federally-chartered credit
union (‘‘FCU’’) to carry on the business
for which it was incorporated. 12 U.S.C.
1757(17); NCUA General Counsel
Opinion No. 99–0229 (Feb. 23, 1999).
To implement the investment
authorities of FCUs, part 703 of NCUA’s
Rules and Regulations, 12 CFR 703,
identifies the investments and
investment activities authorized by the
Act and imposes requirements and
restrictions in order to preserve the
safety and soundness of the credit
unions that hold the investments and
engage in the activities. Id. §§ 703.13,
703.14. Part 703 further identifies
certain investments that it prohibits for
safety and soundness reasons even
though they are authorized by the Act.
Id. §§ 703.15, 703.16. Among these
prohibited transactions, with certain
exceptions, are financial derivatives
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:44 Jun 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
such as futures, options, interest rate
swaps and forward rate agreements. Id.
§ 703.16(a). Hence, FCUs are generally
prohibited from engaging in financial
derivatives transactions that are utilized
by many financial institutions for the
purpose of offsetting their IRR.
Part 703 provides for an exemption
from the prohibition against derivatives
transactions in the form of an
investment pilot program (‘‘Pilot
Program’’) that ‘‘permit[s] a limited
number of [FCUs] to engage in
investment activities prohibited by this
part but permitted by the Act.’’ Id.
§ 703.19(a). An FCU seeking to establish
a Pilot Program of its own to engage in
a prohibited activity must obtain NCUA
approval. Id. § 703.19(b). To be eligible
for approval, an FCU must have a
minimum net worth classification of
‘‘well capitalized’’ and must document
its Pilot Program’s benefits, costs,
internal controls, monitoring systems,
and impact on the financial
performance, risk profile and assetliability management strategies of the
FCU. Id. Presently, there is no limit to
the duration of an approved Pilot
Program.
A third party seeking to establish a
Pilot Program to engage in a prohibited
activity on behalf of client FCUs also
must obtain NCUA approval. Id.
§ 703.19(c). To be eligible for approval,
a third party must describe its Pilot
Program’s activities and document the
benefits and risks to FCU clients with
whom it has contracted. Id. If the third
party’s Pilot Program is approved, an
FCU client generally does not need to
obtain NCUA approval for itself to
participate. Id. § 703.19(d).
C. Pilot Programs To Engage in
Derivatives Activities. Pilot Programs
allowing investment activities
prohibited by part 703 that are
otherwise lawful have been available on
a case-by-case basis since 1998. 62 FR
32989, 32999 (June 18, 1997). The
NCUA Board has since approved Pilot
Programs authorizing two FCUs to each
independently engage in derivatives
activities for IRR management purposes
on its own behalf. Under NCUA’s
Standards for Participating Credit
Unions and Third-Party Derivatives
Pilot Program Applicants (‘‘3rd party
approval standards’’),1 the NCUA Board
1 The
third party approval standards are available
on NCUA Web site: https://www.ncua.gov/
Resources/ALManagementInvest/Investment.aspx.
Although FCU participation in a third party Pilot
Program generally does require NCUA approval,
12 CFR 703.19(d), FCUs participating in a third
party’s Pilot Program to engage in derivatives
activities must obtain Regional Office permission to
participate. There are no approval standards that
apply to an FCU seeking approval of its own Pilot
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37031
approved Pilot Programs authorizing
three third-party entities to engage in
such activities to manage the IRR of
their client FCUs—Western Corporate
FCU (‘‘WesCorp’’) in 2000, ALM First
Financial Advisors, Inc. (‘‘ALM 1st’’) in
2002, and Southwest Corporate
Investment Services, a credit union
service organization (‘‘Southwest
CUSO’’) in 2005.2 Operating standards
governing an FCU’s or a third party’s
approved Pilot Program to engage in
derivatives activities to offset IRR are set
forth in the approvals for each of these
Pilot Programs.
Since the inception of Pilot Programs
allowing investment activities
prohibited by part 703, the NCUA Board
has generally limited its approval of
FCUs seeking to independently engage
in derivatives to offset IRR, primarily for
two reasons. First, such derivatives
present risks that generally are not
familiar to FCUs. Second, FCU demand
for such instruments has been low. Also
for these reasons, the NCUA Board thus
far has not reconsidered whether to
permit derivatives activities on an
elective basis, as other federal financial
institution regulators do, instead of only
under an approved Pilot Program.
D. Policy Alternatives to Existing Pilot
Programs. In 2010, Congress enacted the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act, Public Law
111–203, 124 Stat. 1376 (‘‘DoddFrank’’), to reduce risk, increase
transparency and promote market
integrity within the financial system. To
that end, section 723(a)(3) of DoddFrank requires ‘‘financial entities’’ to
clear their derivatives transactions
through a ‘‘derivatives clearing
organization,’’ i.e., a clearinghouse,
unless an exception to mandatory
clearing applies. 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(1)(A),
2(h)(7)(A)(i). That section directs the
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (‘‘CFTC’’) to consider
whether to exempt certain financial
institutions, including credit unions
with total assets of less than $10 billion,
from the clearing mandate’s ‘‘financial
entity’’ definition. Id. § 2(h)(7)(C)(ii)(III).
The CFTC recently issued for
comment a proposed rule on ‘‘End-User
Exception to Mandatory Clearing of
Swaps.’’ 75 FR 80747 (December 23,
2010). The proposed rule introduces
Program to independently engage in derivatives
transactions for its own benefit.
2 The approval of WesCorp’s Pilot Program
effectively terminated when WesCorp was
liquidated in October 2010. ALM 1st presently has
9 FCU clients, 6 of whom migrated from WesCorp’s
Pilot Program. The approval of Southwest CUSO’s
Pilot Program survives despite the liquidation of
Southwest Corporate FCU in October 2010. Upon
information and belief, however, Southwest CUSO
has never had any FCU clients.
E:\FR\FM\24JNP1.SGM
24JNP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
37032
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2011 / Proposed Rules
new requirements governing the elective
exception to mandatory clearing of
swaps available to swap counterparties,
for which credit unions may qualify.
Excepted institutions would be required
under the rule to report derivative
positions to a registered swap data
repository, and to provide certain items
of information. This information would
describe how the excepted entity meets
its financial obligations associated with
non-cleared swaps, including methods
used to mitigate credit risk. The
information would also indicate the
status of the entity that qualifies it for
an ‘‘end-user exception’’ to the clearing
mandate, and how the reported
derivative is being used to mitigate
commercial risk.
In view of the Dodd-Frank clearing
mandate, and with the benefit of 12
years’ experience with Pilot Programs
allowing derivatives activities, it is
timely for the NCUA Board to
reconsider, and resolve issues related to,
whether and under what conditions it
should permit natural person FCUs to
engage in derivatives transactions for
the purpose of offsetting IRR, i.e.,
whether through approved third parties
or independently.
NCUA is disinclined to allow FCUs to
engage in derivatives activities
unconditionally for several reasons.
First, NCUA must ensure that FCUs do
not use derivatives for the unauthorized
purpose of speculation. Second, the
value of the cash flow streams from
derivative transactions can be unusually
volatile because the value is driven by
the movement of interest rates and level
of volatility in financial markets and
this value can therefore itself be volatile.
Finally, it is reasonable to condition
participation in derivatives activities on
the FCU’s development of sufficient
expertise and infrastructure to manage
IRR and credit risks associated with
derivatives in financial markets. For
these reasons, NCUA is reconsidering
permitting FCUs to engage in derivative
activity only on the basis of a waiver of
the existing regulatory prohibition,
subject to compliance with appropriate
conditions.
In reconsidering derivatives activity
by FCUs for the purpose of offsetting
IRR, the NCUA Board seeks public
comment—in the form of answers to the
specific questions set forth under
‘‘Issues for Comment’’ below—on five
different policy alternatives: (A)
Whether to discontinue allowing Pilot
Programs for FCUs and third parties to
engage in derivatives activity to offset
IRR and, if so, whether to terminate
such existing Pilot Programs; (B)
Whether to allow FCUs to engage in
such derivatives activities through a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:44 Jun 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
third party on a case-by-case basis (i.e.,
by waiver) provided the FCUs meet
prudential standards applicable to the
third party and the FCU; (C) Whether to
allow FCUs to independently engage in
such derivatives activities by waiver
provided they meet prudential
standards; and (D) What approval
standards should be established to
govern the evaluation of an FCU’s
request for approval to engage in
derivatives through a third party; (E)
What approval standards should be
established to govern the evaluation of
an FCU’s request to engage in
derivatives independently?
II. Issues for Comment
To facilitate consideration of the
public’s views, please address your
comments to the questions set forth
below on each issue, and organize and
identify them by corresponding
question number so that each question
is addressed separately. To maximize
the value of public input on each issue,
it is also important that commenters
provide and explain the reasons that
support each of their conclusions. There
will be a further opportunity to
comment on these issues should the
NCUA Board issue a proposed rule
modifying its present policies on
financial derivatives activities to offset
IRR.
A. Existing Pilot Programs
NCUA believes it is timely to
determine whether existing Pilot
Programs are either to be terminated or
incorporated as a permissible activity.
Question No.
1. Should existing Pilot Programs for
FCUs to engage in derivatives for IRR
management be permitted to continue?
Explain why or why not.
2. Should such Pilot Programs for
FCUs be permitted to continue by
‘‘grandfathering’’ the previous approvals
into Part 703? Explain why or why not.
3. If FCUs seek an end-user exception
from mandatory clearing as
contemplated by the CFTC’s proposed
rule, they would need to provide items
of information to a registered swap data
repository. In view of this requirement,
should NCUA permit FCUs to seek an
end-user exception? Explain why or
why not.
B. Third Party Derivative Authorization
In approving third party Pilot
Programs, the NCUA Board sought to
ensure that FCUs would engage in
derivative activities in a safe and sound
manner while allowing FCUs that
lacked experience in derivatives to gain
this experience. 62 FR at 32999. To
achieve that goal, NCUA created
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
standards for third party Pilot Programs
(see note 2 supra) and expected an FCU
to perform initial and ongoing due
diligence of any third party provider
that it uses. The standards cover
requirements for the FCU and for the
third-party providers. The requirements
for an FCU applicant address its
financial condition, required actions of
the board of directors, accounting
standards, counterparty credit quality,
hedge transactions, modeling, internal
controls, legal issues, transaction
termination, and NCUA approval. The
requirements for third-party applicant
address contractual agreements, ongoing
risk assessment, review of credit union
internal controls, reporting to NCUA,
credit union education, and the
maximum number of participants with
each third party.
The Pilot Program standards for an
FCU engaging in third party derivatives
activity are as follows:
Financial Condition. The FCU must
have:
• Minimum net worth ratio of
7 percent or more; and
• Positive, stable earnings for
preceding 12 months.
Board of Directors. The FCU’s board
of directors must:
• Approve the counterparty or
counterparties.
• Update, at least quarterly, the credit
rating and analysis of approved counterparties.
• Approve the proposed types of
derivative transactions, the maximum
limits for aggregate notional principal
amounts permitted for each type of
transaction deemed appropriate by the
FCU’s board of directors. The maximum
limit on derivative exposure in notional
terms should be stated as a percentage
of net worth. The maximum notional
limit for swaps plus the value of the
underlying securities in option
transactions must not exceed 250
percent of net worth.
• Determine hedge objectives and
parameters and designate what
correlation measures will be utilized.
Approve correlation targets and
tolerance limits prior to execution of
each individual transaction.
• Understand, review and approve
each transaction prior to execution and
affirm that transactions will be used
solely to reduce interest rate risk.
• Ensure management monitors the
effectiveness of the hedge on at least a
quarterly basis (preferably monthly) and
reports this information to the board.
• Require management demonstrate it
has adequate knowledge to understand
and monitor hedge positions using
derivative instruments.
E:\FR\FM\24JNP1.SGM
24JNP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2011 / Proposed Rules
a. Accounting Standards. The FCU
will:
• Commit to an annual independent
audit of financial statements. The
statements will be prepared in
accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, including FASB
ASC 815 Derivatives and Hedging. The
audits will be performed in accordance
with generally accepted auditing
standards by a certified public
accountant or public accountant
licensed by the appropriate state or
jurisdiction to perform those services.
• Have external auditors review its
accounting policies and procedures
prior to the first transaction. The
external auditors will opine that the
policies are suitable for these
transactions.
b. Counter-party Credit Quality. All
counter-parties must be rated ‘‘AA-’’ (or
equivalent) or better at the time of any
transaction. Termination of the
transaction is required once a
counterparty is downgraded to ‘‘BBB’’
(or equivalent). When there is a split
rating, the lower rating will prevail.
c. Hedge Transactions. The credit
union will:
• Identify the circumstances leading
to the decision to hedge; and
• Specify derivative transactions to be
employed and definition of:
Æ Hedge type (fair value, cash flow,
etc); and
Æ Analysis to demonstrate
effectiveness of hedge.
Shock analysis will not demonstrate
correlation. Hedge effectiveness requires
correlation through time, must be set
prospectively, and effectiveness must be
assessed retrospectively. Hedge
effectiveness reporting will be required
of the participating credit union and
validated by the applicant. Accounting
rules require that hedges be linked to
specific assets or liabilities and cannot
be related to overall balance sheet risk.
Reports of the macro effects of the hedge
should be limited to the impact of this
on the interest rate risk of the balance
sheet.
d. Modeling. Any model used to
evaluate any hedge transaction using
derivatives must include the ability to
capture all options embedded in the
transaction. For example, option pricing
or option adjusted spread modeling
using simulation methods may be
needed. It must be clear that the model
functionalities capture the specific
behavior of the instrument to be hedged
and the hedge itself.
e. Internal Controls. The FCU must
have the following procedures and
controls in place prior to execution of
the first transaction.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:44 Jun 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
• Designation of the individual(s)
with responsibility for purchasing
derivative instruments.
• Designation of the individual(s) or
departments that have accounting and
risk reporting responsibilities for the
derivative instruments and hedge
transactions.
• Segregation of duties for the
individual(s) obtaining the prices of the
derivative instruments, hedged items,
and other instruments associated with
reporting the hedge transaction and of
those that execute the transaction.
• Segregation of duties for the
individual(s) with derivative instrument
reporting and risk assessment
responsibility and of those involved in
the hedge execution.
• Requirement for monitoring hedge
performance by the asset/liability
committee and the board.
• Requirement that the derivative and
the hedged item be priced by an
independent third party.
f. Legal issues
• The FCU’s legal counsel must opine
that the proposed transactions are legal.
• There must be an International
Swap and Derivatives Association
(ISDA) agreement between the counterparty and the FCU.
• The ISDA agreement must be
supplemented by a bilateral collateral
agreement between counter-party and
the FCU. The bilateral collateral
agreements must require the posting of
collateral by either party that is in a net
deficit position on any derivative that
has been transacted. The agreement
should further specify that the collateral
must be permissible for FCUs to hold
and will be held by an independent
third party.
g. Transaction Termination. Any
cases where designated hedges fail the
limits of hedge effectiveness must be
reported to the board of directors and
the transaction terminated as soon as
practicable. Also, termination of the
transaction is required as soon as
practicable once a counterparty is
downgraded to ‘‘BBB’’ (or equivalent) as
noted above.
Question No.
1. These third party standards would
require replacement of credit quality
references by functional equivalents.
With this change, are the third party
operating standards required in NCUA’s
Pilot Program generally appropriate to
govern the use of derivatives by an FCU
approved to engage in these activities
through a third party? Explain why or
why not.
2. If FCUs lacking prior experience
with derivatives were required to spend
a period of time within a third party
Pilot Program, what period of time and/
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37033
or number of transactions is reasonable
to a safe and sound understanding of
derivatives? In your answer explain why
this is sufficient minimum time or
number of transactions.
C. Independent Derivatives
Authorization
Even if the NCUA Board allows FCUs
having little or no derivatives exposure
to participate in derivatives activities
only through a third-party provider, it is
anticipated that such FCUs may, after a
time, seek to engage in derivative
activities independently of a third party.
In that event, however, further
assessment of the FCU’s knowledge,
expertise, experience and infrastructure
would be necessary, prior to granting
such permission, to determine if the
FCU is able to perform all aspects of
derivatives activity for which the FCU
may have previously relied on the thirdparty provider. The NCUA Board
expects that, during any period of time
when the FCU was acting with a thirdparty provider, the FCU would enhance
its abilities to address asset liability
analysis and modeling, dynamic
hedging functionality, the pricing of any
derivatives purchased, and the impact
of marking-to-market on the value of
derivatives and any hedged items. This
enhanced expertise would serve as the
basis for an application to engage in
derivatives activity independently for
the purpose of offsetting IRR.
Question No.
1. Should the NCUA Board consider
allowing credit unions to engage in
derivatives activity independently?
Explain why or why not.
2. What are the attendant criteria,
such as, asset size, capital adequacy, the
balance sheet composition of a credit
union, or risk exposure with and
without derivatives, that NCUA should
take into consideration in evaluating an
FCU’s request for approval to engage in
derivatives independently? Specify and
explain any criteria that are essential.
3. Are there specific actions an FCU
should expect to take in preparation for
applying to engage in derivatives
activities independently? Specify and
explain any actions which are needed.
D. Approval Standards for Derivatives
Activities Through an Approved Third
Party
An FCU that seeks to engage in
derivatives activity through a third party
Pilot Program must request permission
from its Regional Office to participate
(see note 2 supra), must demonstrate
adequate expertise and infrastructure to
engage in these transactions prior to
doing so, and must provide
documentation to the Pilot Program
E:\FR\FM\24JNP1.SGM
24JNP1
37034
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2011 / Proposed Rules
provider. An FCU must operate
according to the third party pilot
program standards when it is approved
to engage in derivatives activities
through an approved third party. NCUA
therefore seeks comment on the
approval standards for an FCU seeking
to engage in derivatives activity through
a third party.
Question No.
1. Should NCUA require an FCU to
state a balance sheet management plan
to hedge IRR based on risk management
objectives as a condition for approval?
Explain why or why not.
2. Is it useful for an FCU to rely on
the expertise of a third party to assess
the effectiveness of derivatives to hedge
IRR on an ongoing and dynamic basis or
should the FCU be required to
demonstrate it has this expertise
internally as a condition for approval?
In either case explain why or why not.
3. Is it useful for an FCU to rely on
the expertise of a third party to assess
the credit quality of derivative
counterparties? Explain why or why
not.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
E. Approval To Engage Independently
NCUA expects that approving an FCU
to independently engage in derivatives
activity would require extensive
examination of the applicant FCU and
also would require enhanced
supervision. This approval would be
similar to the granting of expanded
authority for a corporate credit union
under recently revised Part 704, 75 FR
64786 (Oct. 20, 2010) and would require
a self-assessment by the FCU to support
its request. The NCUA Board would
expect an FCU to address the following
items prior to granting approval for that
FCU to engage in derivatives activities
independently:
i. Board of directors’ policy
identifying the specific purposes of
specified derivatives activities and
stating limits on maximum exposure in
terms of notional principal amounts and
mark-to-market values of individual and
aggregate swaps;
ii. Ongoing assessment and reporting
to the FCU’s board of directors of
derivative performance in achieving
explicit interest rate risk management
objectives;
iii. Selection criteria for eligible
counterparties that address the process
of identification and credit monitoring;
posting of bilateral collateral and
process for maintenance of available
collateral;
iv. Disclosure of derivative price at
time of purchase expressed as dollar
values of a basis point on each
derivative instrument;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:44 Jun 23, 2011
Jkt 223001
v. Disclosure of costs of terminating
any derivatives in the course of
pursuing any exit strategy.
NCUA would expect the FCU’s board
of directors to review policy
periodically, to review the FCU’s
derivatives positions on an ongoing
basis, and to actively enforce
compliance with the stated IRR
management purpose of derivative
activities.
Question No.
1. Should approval of an FCU to
engage in derivatives activities be in the
form of additional authorization similar
to the expanded authority available
under Appendix B to Part 704—
Expanded Authorities and
Requirements? Explain why or why not.
2. Should an FCU demonstrate
enhanced credit functionality in terms
of the experience of the FCU’s
personnel, credit analysis and reporting
infrastructure in order to evaluate the
creditworthiness of derivative
counterparties? Explain why or why not
and describe any minimum expectation.
3. Should an FCU demonstrate
enhanced hedging expertise based on
the experience of FCU’s personnel or on
additional derivatives management
infrastructure? Explain why or why not,
and describe any minimum expectation.
4. Is one year a sufficient amount of
time for an FCU to fully prepare a selfassessment and application for approval
to independently engage in derivatives
to offset IRR? Explain why it is
sufficient or why more time may be
required.
5. Are there any additional aspects of
the FCU besides items (i)–(v) above
which NCUA should consider in its
approval for the FCU to engage in
derivatives activity independently? If
so, explain why the item should be
considered.
By the National Credit Union
Administration Board on June 17, 2011.
Mary F. Rupp,
Secretary of the Board.
The FAA published a Notice
of Meetings in the Federal Register of
June 17, 2011, concerning a proposal to
modify Class B airspace at Las Vegas,
NV. The document contained an
incorrect address for the informal
airspace meeting scheduled Tuesday,
August 23, 2011, in Henderson, NV.
Also, the document contained the
wrong phone number for the contact
person. The information for the other
two meetings is correct as originally
published.
SUMMARY:
John
Gough, Manager, Airspace and
Procedures, and Bill Ruggiero, Support
Manager Las Vegas, TRACON, 699
Wright Brothers Lane, Las Vegas, NV
89119; telephone: (702)–262–5910.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Correction
In the Federal Register of June 17,
2011, in FR Doc. 2011–15107, on page
35371, column 3, correct meeting
number (2) in the ADDRESSES caption to
read:
ADDRESSES: (2) The meeting on
Tuesday, August 23, 2011, will be held
at Coronado High School, 1001
Coronado Center Drive, Henderson, NV,
89052.
On page 35371, column 3, correct FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT caption
to read:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Gough, Manager, Airspace and
Procedures, and Bill Ruggiero, Support
Manager Las Vegas, TRACON, 699
Wright Brothers Lane, Las Vegas, NV
89119; telephone: (702) 262–5910.
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 20,
2011.
Gary A. Norek,
Acting Manager, Airspace, Regulations and
ATC Procedures Group.
[FR Doc. 2011–15884 Filed 6–23–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
[FR Doc. 2011–15738 Filed 6–23–11; 8:45 am]
Internal Revenue Service
BILLING CODE P
26 CFR Part 1
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[REG–137125–08]
Federal Aviation Administration
RIN 1545–BI65
14 CFR Part 71
Certain Employee Remuneration in
Excess of $1,000,000 Under Internal
Revenue Code Section 162(m)
Proposed Modification of the Las
Vegas, NV, Class B Airspace Area;
Public Meetings; Correction
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of meetings; correction.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
This document contains
proposed regulations relating to the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\24JNP1.SGM
24JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 122 (Friday, June 24, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37030-37034]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15738]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION
12 CFR Part 703
Financial Derivatives Transactions To Offset Interest Rate Risk;
Investment and Deposit Activities
AGENCY: National Credit Union Administration.
ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Through this Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``ANPR''),
the National Credit Union Administration (``NCUA'') requests public
comments on whether and how to modify its rule on investment and
deposit activities to permit a natural person credit union to engage in
the purchase and sale of financial derivatives for the purpose of
offsetting interest rate risk. Although permitted by law, NCUA
currently allows only a limited number of credit unions, on a case-by-
case basis, to engage in such transactions under an investment pilot
program.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 23, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods
(Please send comments by one method only):
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
NCUA Web Site: thttps://www.ncua.gov/RegulationsOpinionsLaws/proposed_ regs/proposed_regs.html. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: Address to regcomments@ncua.gov. Include ``[Your
name] Comments on Part 703 ANPR, Financial Derivatives Transactions to
Offset Interest Rate Risk'' in the e-mail subject line.
Fax: (703) 518-6319. Use the subject line described above
for e-mail.
Mail: Address to Mary Rupp, Secretary of the Board,
National Credit Union Administration, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria,
Virginia 22314-3428.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as mail address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeremy Taylor, Senior Capital Market
Specialist, telephone: 703/518-6628.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. Financial Derivatives Transactions. A financial ``derivative''
is a financial contract, the value of which is derived from the
performance of an underlying asset or market index. An interest rate
``swap,'' for example, may be tied to short-term ``LIBOR rates'', which
are variable, and long-term ``swap rates,'' which are fixed. The
parties to an interest rate ``swap'' transaction can agree to exchange
fixed cash flows for variable cash flows. The purpose may be either
speculative or to reduce risk.
A credit union may enter into a derivatives transaction to protect
itself against interest rate risk. For example, a credit union that has
invested its deposits in a portfolio of mortgages that pays a fixed
rate of interest is exposed to risk of an upward movement in interest
rates. On members' variable rate
[[Page 37031]]
deposits, the credit union will be forced to increase the rates it pays
in order to stay competitive, while the cash flows received from its
portfolio of fixed-rate mortgages remains static. As interest rates
rise, the credit union's net interest margin shrinks, and the value of
the mortgages diminishes.
To offset the impact of rising interest rates, a credit union could
enter into an interest rate ``swap'' in which it exchanges with a
counterparty the fixed-rate cash flows it receives from its mortgages
for variable-rate cash flows that fluctuate with the yield it must pay
on members' deposits. As a result, the credit union's cost of funds
remains the same regardless of interest rate movements.
Alternatively, a credit union could purchase an interest rate
``cap'' that would effectively fix the cost of funds at a pre-agreed
ceiling. For a premium paid by the credit union, the counterparty
agrees to make payments to the credit union when the referenced
variable market rate exceeds the contractual ceiling rate. This payment
would occur at the end of each period in which a referenced rate, like
LIBOR, exceeds the agreed ceiling rate. The interest rate ``cap'' acts
as insurance against rising interest rates since the credit union's
cost of funds on the amount hedged will be offset by counterparty's
payments in excess of the interest rate ceiling. The counterparty thus
absorbs the risk of significant interest rate increases above the
contractual ceiling rate.
B. Authority To Invest in Financial Derivatives. The purchase and
sale of financial derivatives, provided it is for the purpose of
offsetting interest rate risk (``IRR''), is recognized as an
``incidental power'' granted by the Federal Credit Union Act (``the
Act'') to enable a federally-chartered credit union (``FCU'') to carry
on the business for which it was incorporated. 12 U.S.C. 1757(17); NCUA
General Counsel Opinion No. 99-0229 (Feb. 23, 1999).
To implement the investment authorities of FCUs, part 703 of NCUA's
Rules and Regulations, 12 CFR 703, identifies the investments and
investment activities authorized by the Act and imposes requirements
and restrictions in order to preserve the safety and soundness of the
credit unions that hold the investments and engage in the activities.
Id. Sec. Sec. 703.13, 703.14. Part 703 further identifies certain
investments that it prohibits for safety and soundness reasons even
though they are authorized by the Act. Id. Sec. Sec. 703.15, 703.16.
Among these prohibited transactions, with certain exceptions, are
financial derivatives such as futures, options, interest rate swaps and
forward rate agreements. Id. Sec. 703.16(a). Hence, FCUs are generally
prohibited from engaging in financial derivatives transactions that are
utilized by many financial institutions for the purpose of offsetting
their IRR.
Part 703 provides for an exemption from the prohibition against
derivatives transactions in the form of an investment pilot program
(``Pilot Program'') that ``permit[s] a limited number of [FCUs] to
engage in investment activities prohibited by this part but permitted
by the Act.'' Id. Sec. 703.19(a). An FCU seeking to establish a Pilot
Program of its own to engage in a prohibited activity must obtain NCUA
approval. Id. Sec. 703.19(b). To be eligible for approval, an FCU must
have a minimum net worth classification of ``well capitalized'' and
must document its Pilot Program's benefits, costs, internal controls,
monitoring systems, and impact on the financial performance, risk
profile and asset-liability management strategies of the FCU. Id.
Presently, there is no limit to the duration of an approved Pilot
Program.
A third party seeking to establish a Pilot Program to engage in a
prohibited activity on behalf of client FCUs also must obtain NCUA
approval. Id. Sec. 703.19(c). To be eligible for approval, a third
party must describe its Pilot Program's activities and document the
benefits and risks to FCU clients with whom it has contracted. Id. If
the third party's Pilot Program is approved, an FCU client generally
does not need to obtain NCUA approval for itself to participate. Id.
Sec. 703.19(d).
C. Pilot Programs To Engage in Derivatives Activities. Pilot
Programs allowing investment activities prohibited by part 703 that are
otherwise lawful have been available on a case-by-case basis since
1998. 62 FR 32989, 32999 (June 18, 1997). The NCUA Board has since
approved Pilot Programs authorizing two FCUs to each independently
engage in derivatives activities for IRR management purposes on its own
behalf. Under NCUA's Standards for Participating Credit Unions and
Third-Party Derivatives Pilot Program Applicants (``3rd party approval
standards''),\1\ the NCUA Board approved Pilot Programs authorizing
three third-party entities to engage in such activities to manage the
IRR of their client FCUs--Western Corporate FCU (``WesCorp'') in 2000,
ALM First Financial Advisors, Inc. (``ALM 1st'') in 2002, and Southwest
Corporate Investment Services, a credit union service organization
(``Southwest CUSO'') in 2005.\2\ Operating standards governing an FCU's
or a third party's approved Pilot Program to engage in derivatives
activities to offset IRR are set forth in the approvals for each of
these Pilot Programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The third party approval standards are available on NCUA Web
site: https://www.ncua.gov/Resources/ALManagementInvest/Investment.aspx. Although FCU participation in a third party Pilot
Program generally does require NCUA approval, 12 CFR 703.19(d), FCUs
participating in a third party's Pilot Program to engage in
derivatives activities must obtain Regional Office permission to
participate. There are no approval standards that apply to an FCU
seeking approval of its own Pilot Program to independently engage in
derivatives transactions for its own benefit.
\2\ The approval of WesCorp's Pilot Program effectively
terminated when WesCorp was liquidated in October 2010. ALM 1st
presently has 9 FCU clients, 6 of whom migrated from WesCorp's Pilot
Program. The approval of Southwest CUSO's Pilot Program survives
despite the liquidation of Southwest Corporate FCU in October 2010.
Upon information and belief, however, Southwest CUSO has never had
any FCU clients.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the inception of Pilot Programs allowing investment
activities prohibited by part 703, the NCUA Board has generally limited
its approval of FCUs seeking to independently engage in derivatives to
offset IRR, primarily for two reasons. First, such derivatives present
risks that generally are not familiar to FCUs. Second, FCU demand for
such instruments has been low. Also for these reasons, the NCUA Board
thus far has not reconsidered whether to permit derivatives activities
on an elective basis, as other federal financial institution regulators
do, instead of only under an approved Pilot Program.
D. Policy Alternatives to Existing Pilot Programs. In 2010,
Congress enacted the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act, Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (``Dodd-Frank''), to
reduce risk, increase transparency and promote market integrity within
the financial system. To that end, section 723(a)(3) of Dodd-Frank
requires ``financial entities'' to clear their derivatives transactions
through a ``derivatives clearing organization,'' i.e., a clearinghouse,
unless an exception to mandatory clearing applies. 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(1)(A),
2(h)(7)(A)(i). That section directs the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (``CFTC'') to consider whether to exempt certain financial
institutions, including credit unions with total assets of less than
$10 billion, from the clearing mandate's ``financial entity''
definition. Id. Sec. 2(h)(7)(C)(ii)(III).
The CFTC recently issued for comment a proposed rule on ``End-User
Exception to Mandatory Clearing of Swaps.'' 75 FR 80747 (December 23,
2010). The proposed rule introduces
[[Page 37032]]
new requirements governing the elective exception to mandatory clearing
of swaps available to swap counterparties, for which credit unions may
qualify. Excepted institutions would be required under the rule to
report derivative positions to a registered swap data repository, and
to provide certain items of information. This information would
describe how the excepted entity meets its financial obligations
associated with non-cleared swaps, including methods used to mitigate
credit risk. The information would also indicate the status of the
entity that qualifies it for an ``end-user exception'' to the clearing
mandate, and how the reported derivative is being used to mitigate
commercial risk.
In view of the Dodd-Frank clearing mandate, and with the benefit of
12 years' experience with Pilot Programs allowing derivatives
activities, it is timely for the NCUA Board to reconsider, and resolve
issues related to, whether and under what conditions it should permit
natural person FCUs to engage in derivatives transactions for the
purpose of offsetting IRR, i.e., whether through approved third parties
or independently.
NCUA is disinclined to allow FCUs to engage in derivatives
activities unconditionally for several reasons. First, NCUA must ensure
that FCUs do not use derivatives for the unauthorized purpose of
speculation. Second, the value of the cash flow streams from derivative
transactions can be unusually volatile because the value is driven by
the movement of interest rates and level of volatility in financial
markets and this value can therefore itself be volatile. Finally, it is
reasonable to condition participation in derivatives activities on the
FCU's development of sufficient expertise and infrastructure to manage
IRR and credit risks associated with derivatives in financial markets.
For these reasons, NCUA is reconsidering permitting FCUs to engage in
derivative activity only on the basis of a waiver of the existing
regulatory prohibition, subject to compliance with appropriate
conditions.
In reconsidering derivatives activity by FCUs for the purpose of
offsetting IRR, the NCUA Board seeks public comment--in the form of
answers to the specific questions set forth under ``Issues for
Comment'' below--on five different policy alternatives: (A) Whether to
discontinue allowing Pilot Programs for FCUs and third parties to
engage in derivatives activity to offset IRR and, if so, whether to
terminate such existing Pilot Programs; (B) Whether to allow FCUs to
engage in such derivatives activities through a third party on a case-
by-case basis (i.e., by waiver) provided the FCUs meet prudential
standards applicable to the third party and the FCU; (C) Whether to
allow FCUs to independently engage in such derivatives activities by
waiver provided they meet prudential standards; and (D) What approval
standards should be established to govern the evaluation of an FCU's
request for approval to engage in derivatives through a third party;
(E) What approval standards should be established to govern the
evaluation of an FCU's request to engage in derivatives independently?
II. Issues for Comment
To facilitate consideration of the public's views, please address
your comments to the questions set forth below on each issue, and
organize and identify them by corresponding question number so that
each question is addressed separately. To maximize the value of public
input on each issue, it is also important that commenters provide and
explain the reasons that support each of their conclusions. There will
be a further opportunity to comment on these issues should the NCUA
Board issue a proposed rule modifying its present policies on financial
derivatives activities to offset IRR.
A. Existing Pilot Programs
NCUA believes it is timely to determine whether existing Pilot
Programs are either to be terminated or incorporated as a permissible
activity.
Question No.
1. Should existing Pilot Programs for FCUs to engage in derivatives
for IRR management be permitted to continue? Explain why or why not.
2. Should such Pilot Programs for FCUs be permitted to continue by
``grandfathering'' the previous approvals into Part 703? Explain why or
why not.
3. If FCUs seek an end-user exception from mandatory clearing as
contemplated by the CFTC's proposed rule, they would need to provide
items of information to a registered swap data repository. In view of
this requirement, should NCUA permit FCUs to seek an end-user
exception? Explain why or why not.
B. Third Party Derivative Authorization
In approving third party Pilot Programs, the NCUA Board sought to
ensure that FCUs would engage in derivative activities in a safe and
sound manner while allowing FCUs that lacked experience in derivatives
to gain this experience. 62 FR at 32999. To achieve that goal, NCUA
created standards for third party Pilot Programs (see note 2 supra) and
expected an FCU to perform initial and ongoing due diligence of any
third party provider that it uses. The standards cover requirements for
the FCU and for the third-party providers. The requirements for an FCU
applicant address its financial condition, required actions of the
board of directors, accounting standards, counterparty credit quality,
hedge transactions, modeling, internal controls, legal issues,
transaction termination, and NCUA approval. The requirements for third-
party applicant address contractual agreements, ongoing risk
assessment, review of credit union internal controls, reporting to
NCUA, credit union education, and the maximum number of participants
with each third party.
The Pilot Program standards for an FCU engaging in third party
derivatives activity are as follows:
Financial Condition. The FCU must have:
Minimum net worth ratio of 7 percent or more; and
Positive, stable earnings for preceding 12 months.
Board of Directors. The FCU's board of directors must:
Approve the counterparty or counterparties.
Update, at least quarterly, the credit rating and analysis
of approved counter-parties.
Approve the proposed types of derivative transactions, the
maximum limits for aggregate notional principal amounts permitted for
each type of transaction deemed appropriate by the FCU's board of
directors. The maximum limit on derivative exposure in notional terms
should be stated as a percentage of net worth. The maximum notional
limit for swaps plus the value of the underlying securities in option
transactions must not exceed 250 percent of net worth.
Determine hedge objectives and parameters and designate
what correlation measures will be utilized. Approve correlation targets
and tolerance limits prior to execution of each individual transaction.
Understand, review and approve each transaction prior to
execution and affirm that transactions will be used solely to reduce
interest rate risk.
Ensure management monitors the effectiveness of the hedge
on at least a quarterly basis (preferably monthly) and reports this
information to the board.
Require management demonstrate it has adequate knowledge
to understand and monitor hedge positions using derivative instruments.
[[Page 37033]]
a. Accounting Standards. The FCU will:
Commit to an annual independent audit of financial
statements. The statements will be prepared in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles, including FASB ASC 815
Derivatives and Hedging. The audits will be performed in accordance
with generally accepted auditing standards by a certified public
accountant or public accountant licensed by the appropriate state or
jurisdiction to perform those services.
Have external auditors review its accounting policies and
procedures prior to the first transaction. The external auditors will
opine that the policies are suitable for these transactions.
b. Counter-party Credit Quality. All counter-parties must be rated
``AA-'' (or equivalent) or better at the time of any transaction.
Termination of the transaction is required once a counterparty is
downgraded to ``BBB'' (or equivalent). When there is a split rating,
the lower rating will prevail.
c. Hedge Transactions. The credit union will:
Identify the circumstances leading to the decision to
hedge; and
Specify derivative transactions to be employed and
definition of:
[cir] Hedge type (fair value, cash flow, etc); and
[cir] Analysis to demonstrate effectiveness of hedge.
Shock analysis will not demonstrate correlation. Hedge effectiveness
requires correlation through time, must be set prospectively, and
effectiveness must be assessed retrospectively. Hedge effectiveness
reporting will be required of the participating credit union and
validated by the applicant. Accounting rules require that hedges be
linked to specific assets or liabilities and cannot be related to
overall balance sheet risk. Reports of the macro effects of the hedge
should be limited to the impact of this on the interest rate risk of
the balance sheet.
d. Modeling. Any model used to evaluate any hedge transaction using
derivatives must include the ability to capture all options embedded in
the transaction. For example, option pricing or option adjusted spread
modeling using simulation methods may be needed. It must be clear that
the model functionalities capture the specific behavior of the
instrument to be hedged and the hedge itself.
e. Internal Controls. The FCU must have the following procedures
and controls in place prior to execution of the first transaction.
Designation of the individual(s) with responsibility for
purchasing derivative instruments.
Designation of the individual(s) or departments that have
accounting and risk reporting responsibilities for the derivative
instruments and hedge transactions.
Segregation of duties for the individual(s) obtaining the
prices of the derivative instruments, hedged items, and other
instruments associated with reporting the hedge transaction and of
those that execute the transaction.
Segregation of duties for the individual(s) with
derivative instrument reporting and risk assessment responsibility and
of those involved in the hedge execution.
Requirement for monitoring hedge performance by the asset/
liability committee and the board.
Requirement that the derivative and the hedged item be
priced by an independent third party.
f. Legal issues
The FCU's legal counsel must opine that the proposed
transactions are legal.
There must be an International Swap and Derivatives
Association (ISDA) agreement between the counter-party and the FCU.
The ISDA agreement must be supplemented by a bilateral
collateral agreement between counter-party and the FCU. The bilateral
collateral agreements must require the posting of collateral by either
party that is in a net deficit position on any derivative that has been
transacted. The agreement should further specify that the collateral
must be permissible for FCUs to hold and will be held by an independent
third party.
g. Transaction Termination. Any cases where designated hedges fail
the limits of hedge effectiveness must be reported to the board of
directors and the transaction terminated as soon as practicable. Also,
termination of the transaction is required as soon as practicable once
a counterparty is downgraded to ``BBB'' (or equivalent) as noted above.
Question No.
1. These third party standards would require replacement of credit
quality references by functional equivalents. With this change, are the
third party operating standards required in NCUA's Pilot Program
generally appropriate to govern the use of derivatives by an FCU
approved to engage in these activities through a third party? Explain
why or why not.
2. If FCUs lacking prior experience with derivatives were required
to spend a period of time within a third party Pilot Program, what
period of time and/or number of transactions is reasonable to a safe
and sound understanding of derivatives? In your answer explain why this
is sufficient minimum time or number of transactions.
C. Independent Derivatives Authorization
Even if the NCUA Board allows FCUs having little or no derivatives
exposure to participate in derivatives activities only through a third-
party provider, it is anticipated that such FCUs may, after a time,
seek to engage in derivative activities independently of a third party.
In that event, however, further assessment of the FCU's knowledge,
expertise, experience and infrastructure would be necessary, prior to
granting such permission, to determine if the FCU is able to perform
all aspects of derivatives activity for which the FCU may have
previously relied on the third-party provider. The NCUA Board expects
that, during any period of time when the FCU was acting with a third-
party provider, the FCU would enhance its abilities to address asset
liability analysis and modeling, dynamic hedging functionality, the
pricing of any derivatives purchased, and the impact of marking-to-
market on the value of derivatives and any hedged items. This enhanced
expertise would serve as the basis for an application to engage in
derivatives activity independently for the purpose of offsetting IRR.
Question No.
1. Should the NCUA Board consider allowing credit unions to engage
in derivatives activity independently? Explain why or why not.
2. What are the attendant criteria, such as, asset size, capital
adequacy, the balance sheet composition of a credit union, or risk
exposure with and without derivatives, that NCUA should take into
consideration in evaluating an FCU's request for approval to engage in
derivatives independently? Specify and explain any criteria that are
essential.
3. Are there specific actions an FCU should expect to take in
preparation for applying to engage in derivatives activities
independently? Specify and explain any actions which are needed.
D. Approval Standards for Derivatives Activities Through an Approved
Third Party
An FCU that seeks to engage in derivatives activity through a third
party Pilot Program must request permission from its Regional Office to
participate (see note 2 supra), must demonstrate adequate expertise and
infrastructure to engage in these transactions prior to doing so, and
must provide documentation to the Pilot Program
[[Page 37034]]
provider. An FCU must operate according to the third party pilot
program standards when it is approved to engage in derivatives
activities through an approved third party. NCUA therefore seeks
comment on the approval standards for an FCU seeking to engage in
derivatives activity through a third party.
Question No.
1. Should NCUA require an FCU to state a balance sheet management
plan to hedge IRR based on risk management objectives as a condition
for approval? Explain why or why not.
2. Is it useful for an FCU to rely on the expertise of a third
party to assess the effectiveness of derivatives to hedge IRR on an
ongoing and dynamic basis or should the FCU be required to demonstrate
it has this expertise internally as a condition for approval? In either
case explain why or why not.
3. Is it useful for an FCU to rely on the expertise of a third
party to assess the credit quality of derivative counterparties?
Explain why or why not.
E. Approval To Engage Independently
NCUA expects that approving an FCU to independently engage in
derivatives activity would require extensive examination of the
applicant FCU and also would require enhanced supervision. This
approval would be similar to the granting of expanded authority for a
corporate credit union under recently revised Part 704, 75 FR 64786
(Oct. 20, 2010) and would require a self-assessment by the FCU to
support its request. The NCUA Board would expect an FCU to address the
following items prior to granting approval for that FCU to engage in
derivatives activities independently:
i. Board of directors' policy identifying the specific purposes of
specified derivatives activities and stating limits on maximum exposure
in terms of notional principal amounts and mark-to-market values of
individual and aggregate swaps;
ii. Ongoing assessment and reporting to the FCU's board of
directors of derivative performance in achieving explicit interest rate
risk management objectives;
iii. Selection criteria for eligible counterparties that address
the process of identification and credit monitoring; posting of
bilateral collateral and process for maintenance of available
collateral;
iv. Disclosure of derivative price at time of purchase expressed as
dollar values of a basis point on each derivative instrument;
v. Disclosure of costs of terminating any derivatives in the course
of pursuing any exit strategy.
NCUA would expect the FCU's board of directors to review policy
periodically, to review the FCU's derivatives positions on an ongoing
basis, and to actively enforce compliance with the stated IRR
management purpose of derivative activities.
Question No.
1. Should approval of an FCU to engage in derivatives activities be
in the form of additional authorization similar to the expanded
authority available under Appendix B to Part 704--Expanded Authorities
and Requirements? Explain why or why not.
2. Should an FCU demonstrate enhanced credit functionality in terms
of the experience of the FCU's personnel, credit analysis and reporting
infrastructure in order to evaluate the creditworthiness of derivative
counterparties? Explain why or why not and describe any minimum
expectation.
3. Should an FCU demonstrate enhanced hedging expertise based on
the experience of FCU's personnel or on additional derivatives
management infrastructure? Explain why or why not, and describe any
minimum expectation.
4. Is one year a sufficient amount of time for an FCU to fully
prepare a self-assessment and application for approval to independently
engage in derivatives to offset IRR? Explain why it is sufficient or
why more time may be required.
5. Are there any additional aspects of the FCU besides items (i)-
(v) above which NCUA should consider in its approval for the FCU to
engage in derivatives activity independently? If so, explain why the
item should be considered.
By the National Credit Union Administration Board on June 17,
2011.
Mary F. Rupp,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2011-15738 Filed 6-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P