XML 34 R16.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.3.1.900
FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2015
Fair Value Of Financial Instruments [Abstract]  
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
NOTE 8 - FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
 
UNL values its investments in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification 820 – Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820”). ASC 820 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles, and expands disclosures about fair value measurement. The changes to past practice resulting from the application of ASC 820 relate to the definition of fair value, the methods used to measure fair value, and the expanded disclosures about fair value measurement. ASC 820 establishes a fair value hierarchy that distinguishes between: (1) market participant assumptions developed based on market data obtained from sources independent of UNL (observable inputs) and (2) UNL’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions developed based on the best information available under the circumstances (unobservable inputs). The three levels defined by the ASC 820 hierarchy are as follows:
 
Level I – Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for  identical assets or liabilities that the reporting entity has the ability to access at the measurement date.
 
Level II – Inputs other than quoted prices included within Level I that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level II assets include the following: quoted prices for  similar assets or liabilities in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability, and inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means (market-corroborated inputs).
 
Level III – Unobservable pricing input at the measurement date for the asset or liability. Unobservable inputs shall be used to measure fair value to the extent that observable inputs are not available.
 
In some instances, the inputs used to measure fair value might fall within different levels of the fair value hierarchy. The level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement in its entirety falls shall be determined based on the lowest input level that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety.
 
The following table summarizes the valuation of UNL’s securities at December 31, 2015 using the fair value hierarchy:
 
At December 31, 2015
 
Total
 
Level I
 
Level II
 
Level III
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Short-Term Investments
 
$
8,495,184
 
$
8,495,184
 
$
 
$
 
Exchange-Traded Futures Contracts
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
United States Contracts
 
 
(2,421,976)
 
 
(2,421,976)
 
 
 
 
 
 
During the year ended December 31, 2015, there were no transfers between Level I and Level II.
 
The following table summarizes the valuation of UNL’s securities at December 31, 2014 using the fair value hierarchy:
 
At December 31, 2014
 
Total
 
Level I
 
Level II
 
Level III
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Short-Term Investments
 
$
12,510,147
 
$
12,510,147
 
$
 
$
 
Exchange-Traded Futures Contracts
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
United States Contracts
 
 
(4,919,890)
 
 
(4,919,890)
 
 
 
 
 
 
During the year ended December 31, 2014, there were no transfers between Level I and Level II.
 
Effective January 1, 2009, UNL adopted the provisions of Accounting Standards Codification 815 – Derivatives and Hedging (“ASC 815”), which require presentation of qualitative disclosures about objectives and strategies for using derivatives, quantitative disclosures about fair value amounts and gains and losses on derivatives.
 
Fair Value of Derivative Instruments
 
 
 
Statements of
 
 
 
 
 
Derivatives not Accounted
 
Financial Condition
 
Fair Value At
 
Fair Value At
 
for as Hedging Instruments
 
Location
 
December 31, 2015
 
December 31, 2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Futures - Commodity Contracts
 
Assets
 
$
(2,421,976)
 
$
(4,919,890)
 
 
The Effect of Derivative Instruments on the Statements of Operations
 
 
 
 
 
For the year ended
 
For the year ended
 
For the year ended
 
 
 
 
 
December 31, 2015
 
December 31, 2014
 
December 31, 2013
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Change in
 
 
 
Change in
 
 
 
Change in
 
 
 
Location of
 
Realized
 
Unrealized
 
Realized
 
Unrealized
 
Realized
 
Unrealized
 
 
 
Gain
 
Gain
 
Gain
 
Gain
 
Gain
 
Gain
 
Gain
 
 
 
(Loss) on
 
(Loss) on
 
(Loss) on
 
(Loss) on
 
(Loss) on
 
(Loss) on
 
(Loss) on
 
 
 
Derivatives
 
Derivatives
 
Derivatives
 
Derivatives
 
Derivatives
 
Derivatives
 
Derivatives
 
Derivatives not Accounted
 
Recognized
 
Recognized
 
Recognized
 
Recognized
 
Recognized
 
Recognized
 
Recognized
 
for as Hedging Instruments
 
in Income
 
in Income
 
in Income
 
in Income
 
in Income
 
in Income
 
in Income
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Futures - Commodity Contracts
 
Realized gain (loss)  on closed positions
 
$
(6,916,714)
 
 
 
 
$
2,205,950
 
 
 
 
$
2,395,300
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Change in unrealized gain (loss) on open positions
 
 
 
 
$
2,497,914
 
 
 
 
$
(6,009,940)
 
 
 
 
$
1,996,630