1

Orderly Liquidation Authority

Building Operational Readiness

December 6, 2018
2

Overview

 Orderly Liquidation Authority (OLA) resolution planning 

benefits significantly from the Title I process

 The FDIC has established a comprehensive program 

for building and maintaining execution readiness

 Increased awareness among market participants and 

other members of the public of how an OLA resolution 

would unfold could enhance the effectiveness of the 

authority should it be needed
3

Role of OLA in U.S. Resolution Regime

 Extends resolution tools similar to the FDIC’s longstanding bank 

resolution authorities to non-bank financial companies—e.g., 

bridge authority, liquidity facility

 Serves as a backstop to bankruptcy where necessary to curtail 

systemic risk to the U.S. financial system

 The OLA report reaffirms that bankruptcy is the “resolution method of first resort”

 For Title I plan filers, OLA would leverage certain plan elements including processes 

for executing an SPOE strategy and firm capabilities

 Statute prohibits costs to taxpayers and provides funding strictly 

for temporary liquidity support

 Losses are borne by equity holders and impaired creditors

 Backstop funding through the Orderly Liquidation Fund (OLF) is available if needed to 

assure continuity of critical operations and minimize risk of systemic impact (industry 

assessment available, if necessary, to repay OLF borrowing)
Treasury Report Recommendations on 

Improving OLA

 There are a number of important recommendations in 

the Treasury report, particularly those that further 

improve public transparency

 Specific recommendations from the OLA Report that we 

will be closely considering include:

 Finalizing SPOE notice for comment

 Further restricting disparate treatment of similarly situated creditors

 Further protecting OLF advances from the risk of loss

4
Progress Addressing Core Challenges

• Development of SPOE

• Loss-absorbing capacity, including pre-positioned and contributable 

resources

Multiple competing 

insolvencies

• Firms’ liquidity forecasting models (Resolution Liquidity Adequacy & Funding and liquidity Positioning (RLAP), Resolution Liquidity Execution Need (RLEN))

• Legal entity rationalization

• Shared services framework

Operations and 

interconnectedness

• ISDA Protocol, addressing stays for cross-border Qualified Financial 

Contracts (QFCs)

• Financial Market Utility (FMU) continuity playbooks, addressing 

additional margin requirements

Counterparty actions

• Regular formal and informal engagement with host authorities in a 

variety of fora

• Establishment of shared expectations and coordination protocols 

that reduce risk of destructive “ring fencing”

Global coordination

5
6

Systemic Resolution Readiness Program

• Operational Exercise 1 (2015)

• Operational Exercise 2 (2016)

• Principal-Level Exercises (about every two years)

Systemic Resolution 

Framework

Primary actions across 

core functional areas

• Focused inter-agency exercises, 

workshops, and ongoing collaboration 

(e.g., 3-keys, funding)

• Bi-lateral and multi-lateral cross-border 

playbook exercises

• Internal FDIC execution readiness 

exercises

Process Documents and 

Testing

Playbooks, process 

documents, templates, 

reference documents

• Title I plan reviews

• Firm-specific strategic OLA 

analysis (annual) 

• Cross-border Crisis 

Management Groups (annual)

Institution-Specific Planning

Strategic alternatives, operational 

considerations, cross-border coordination
7

OLA Processes Supported by Firm 

Capabilities Established Through Title I

 Mapping recovery and resolution actions through “runway”

 Governance mechanisms and associated triggers provide another tool for assessing the trajectory of a 

firm’s condition across the crisis continuum, and for anticipating associated actions 

 Addressing capital needs at material entities

 Resolution Capital Adequacy & Positioning (RCAP) and Resolution Capital Execution Need (RCEN) 

modeling calculate and position loss-absorbing resources in the locations most needed, and serve as a 

basis for determining recapitalization needs

 Projecting liquidity stresses across the group

 RLAP and RLEN modeling assess the factors that drive liquidity stresses and project the location and 

timing of liquidity needs

 Delivery of communications

 Communications playbooks can be leveraged to deliver messaging to the broad array of stakeholders that 

must be reached upon entry into resolution—firm personnel, counterparties, customers etc.

 Other 

 Continuity of access to FMUs (FMU playbooks)

 Continuity of shared services (resolution-friendly contracts, working capital) 

 Retention of key operational staff (retention plans)

 Objects of sale (divestiture playbooks, data rooms)
Bridge Governance

8

Balanced Approach

FDIC retains 

certain key controls

Approval of:

 Orderly Liquidation Plan (OLP) for reorganization of the Bridge

 Amendments to articles of association and bylaws

 Bridge Board of Directors 

 Appointment of CEO or other designated senior executive officers

 Material divestitures

 Any mergers, consolidation or reorganization of Bridge

 Oversight of funding plan, including approach to use of Orderly Liquidation 

Fund (OLF)

 Independent auditor, valuation consultant

New Bridge Board 

and CEO oversee 

day-to-day 

operations

 Manage operations consistent with governing documents and OLP

 Continued oversight of subsidiaries, which continue to operate under their 

existing governance and regulatory structures

 Retain approved contractors for asset valuation and audits

 Manage funding and make intercompany advances

 Hire and terminate officers and employees (other than designated key officers)

8
Transparency and Engagement

 Transparency efforts undertaken to date

 Public portions of Title I plans and letters

 SRAC – open to public

 Outreach to rating agencies

 Speeches and other public statements

 Notice in the Federal Register - Single Point of Entry 

 OLA is addressed in various public rules and regulations

 Future priorities

 U.S. Department of the Treasury (UST) report recommendations

 Further industry outreach and vetting of processes

 Deepening and broadening international engagement

9