SEGMENT 1:

Kyle Hadley, Chief of the Examination Support Section, Capital Markets Branch,
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

- History of international and domestic liquidity guidance
     - Past regulatory oversight
     - Modern perspective

- Overview of the WGL and BCBS Guidance
     - Overview of September 2008 Sound Principles
       - BCBS WGL issued guidance in September 2008.
       - The guidance covers 17 principles of sound liquidity risk management and supervision.
       - All major countries have agreed to implement the principles.
       - Principles are basis for proposed U.S. interagency guidance.

- Overview of U.S. Supervisory Liquidity Process – Proposed Interagency Guidance (FIL-37-2009)
     - Federal banking agencies and NCUA issued proposed guidance in June 2009 for public
       comment.
     - Where appropriate, conforms to BCBS sound principles.
     - Highlights of the proposed guidance:
         - Appropriate strategies, policies, procedures and limits;
         - Comprehensive liquidity risk measurement and monitoring systems;
         - Active management of intraday liquidity and collateral;
         - Monitor and maintain liquidity at both consolidated and legal entity levels;
         - Diverse mix of existing and potential future funding needs;
         - Adequate levels of highly liquid marketable securities; and
         - Comprehensive CFP
     - Time horizon for release of final rule – 1Q2010

- Overview of December 2009 International Framework for Liquidity Risk Measurement,
  Standards and Monitoring
     - Regulatory Standards for Liquidity Risk Measurement
         - Liquidity Coverage Ratio
         - Net Stable Funding Ratio

     - Monitoring Tools – the minimum types of information used to monitor the liquidity risk profiles of
       institutions:
         - Contractual Maturity Mismatch
         - Concentration of Funding
         - Available Unencumbered Assets
         - Market-Related Monitoring Tools

SEGMENT 2:

Peter B. Marshall, Financial Services Risk Management,
Ernst & Young LLP

Corporate governance and risk tolerance - the focus on survival horizon, sufficient liquidity buffer and contingency plans. I would discuss the migration to using the 30-day survival horizon the size the liquidity buffer, as well as longer-term survival horizon under less severe stress tests to evaluate and validate contingency funding plans and strategic capital and budgeting plans

Liquidity risk measurement and metrics - enhanced stress testing and linking the interagency principles with the elements of the new BCBS proposal. I would expect to discuss issues such as the need for entity level liquidity reporting and stress testing, as well as a comprehensive, top of the house view, as well as the metrics the organizations are converging on such as liquidity coverage, survival horizon, stable funding / structural liquidity, and investor concentration. I also plan to discuss the need for integrated and dynamic balance sheet analyses to understand the interplay between liquidity, capital, earnings and solvency.

Funds transfer pricing and liquidity premiums - I plan on discussing the importance of effective pricing of liquidity, the use of FTP to drive behavior, as well as key challenges, such as lack of granular data, the need for better tools to calculate and report entity level attribution and the approaches to influence business level decision making

SEGMENT 3:

Mary Frances Monroe, Vice President, Office of Regulatory Policy,
American Bankers Association


- There is a strong need for better tools and methodologies to understand group-wide liquidity risks
   and dependencies, recognizing that the aggregation of group-wide risk is not a simple additive
   process.
    - Support for industry-regulator collaboration
    - Need for industry input into domestic and international efforts on risk aggregation

- There is a compelling need to advance work on understanding the interactions and dependencies
   among liquidity risk, on the one hand, and other risks, including but not limited to credit, market, and
   operational risks.
    - Again, this should be conducted with significant industry input into domestic and international
      efforts

- Liquidity risk is highly idiosyncratic. To that end, it is important to incorporate a high degree of
   flexibility into the implementation of the guidance in order to reflect different business models, local
   markets, changes in market conditions, and the impact of other risks, particularly credit, market,
   and operational risks, on liquidity risk.
    - Flexibility is important both with respect to qualitative and quantitative (e.g., metrics) measures of
      liquidity risk and assessments of liquidity risk management

- Reflecting the idiosyncratic nature of liquidity risk and the manner in which the sources and impacts
   of liquidity risk may manifest themselves, it is important to allow banks a significant degree of
   flexibility with respect to the development of contingency funding plans and stress tests.