![]() |
Enron Mail |
I've gone back through the ISDA Credit Support Annex and the "green book" and
my conclusion is that unless we modify the standard form, we have to give an Independent Amount back to the counterparty when we go out of the money far enough (note that the definition of Exposure results in a negative number when we are out of the money reducing the Credit Support Amount below the Independent Amount). The theory there is that as the market moves against us, we are cushioned by our "out-of-the-moneyness" and will be able to ask for support as the market moves back in our favor before we are actually in the money. I'm afraid that Credit has been operating under the assumption that we get to keep Independent Amounts until the Transaction terminates. We need to set up a system with Credit so we all know what is meant on the credit work sheets -- i.e. whether a cushion or up-front amount should be given back to the counterparty as we go out of the money or not (maybe the paralegals can suggest something?). I suggest we add the following language (taken from the green book) when we are using Paragraph 13 and Credit tells us they don't want to have to give the cushion amount back, no matter how far we go out of the money: "Credit Support Amount" will mean the higher of (i) the amount calculated as provided in the definition of that term in Paragraph 3(b) and (ii) the sum of the Pledgor's Independent Amounts. I will modify the Force Energy document to include it and, unless you would like to suggest alternative language, ask Tana to add it to our list of alternatives for Paragraph 13.
|