Emergency Mergers-Chartering and Field of Membership, 35493-35498 [2017-15685]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 145 / Monday, July 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
estate-related financial transaction to
finance the initial construction of a 1-to4 family residential property that does
not include permanent financing is a
commercial real estate transaction.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. Section 323.3 is amended by:
■ a. Removing the word ‘‘or’’ at the end
of paragraph (a)(11);
■ b. Revising paragraph (a)(12);
■ c. Adding paragraph (a)(13);
■ d. Revising paragraph (b); and
■ e. Revising paragraph (d)(2).
The revisions and addition read as
follows:
§ 323.3 Appraisals required; transactions
requiring a State certified or licensed
appraiser.
(a) * * *
(12) The FDIC determines that the
services of an appraiser are not
necessary in order to protect Federal
financial and public policy interests in
real estate-related financial transactions
or to protect the safety and soundness
of the institution; or
(13) The transaction is a commercial
real estate transaction that has a
transaction value of $400,000 or less.
(b) Evaluations required. For a
transaction that does not require the
services of a State certified or licensed
appraiser under paragraph (a)(1), (a)(5),
(a)(7), or (a)(13) of this section, the
institution shall obtain an appropriate
evaluation of real property collateral
that is consistent with safe and sound
banking practices.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(2) Commercial real estate
transactions of more than $400,000. All
federally related transactions that are
commercial real estate transactions
having a transaction value of more than
$400,000 shall require an appraisal
prepared by a State certified appraiser.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: July 18, 2017.
Keith A. Noreika,
Acting Comptroller of the Currency.
sradovich on DSKBCFCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
By order of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, July 18, 2017.
Margaret McCloskey Shanks,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
Dated at Washington, DC, this 18th of July,
2017.
By order of the Board of Directors.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:29 Jul 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–15748 Filed 7–28–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION
ADMINISTRATION
12 CFR Part 701
RIN 3133–AE76
Emergency Mergers—Chartering and
Field of Membership
National Credit Union
Administration (NCUA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The NCUA Board (Board)
proposes to amend in its Chartering and
Field of Membership Manual the
definition of the term ‘‘in danger of
insolvency’’ for emergency merger
purposes. The current definition
requires a credit union to fall into at
least one of three net worth categories
over a period of time to be ‘‘in danger
of insolvency.’’ For two of the three
categories, the Board proposes to
lengthen by six months the forecast
horizons, the time period in which
NCUA projects a credit union’s net
worth will decline to the point that it
falls into one of the categories. This will
extend the time period in which a credit
union’s net worth is projected to either
render it insolvent or drop below two
percent from 24 to 30 months and from
12 to 18 months, respectively.
Additionally, the Board proposes to add
a fourth category to the three existing
net worth categories to include credit
unions that have been granted or
received assistance under section 208 of
the Federal Credit Union Act (FCU Act)
in the 15 months prior to the Region’s
determination that the credit union is in
danger of insolvency.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before September 29, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any 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: https://
www.ncua.gov/regulation-supervision/
Pages/rules/proposed.aspx. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35493
• Email: Address to regcomments@
ncua.gov. Include ‘‘[Your name]
Comments on Proposed Rule 701, In
Danger of Insolvency Definition’’ in the
email subject line.
• Fax: (703) 518–6319. Use the
subject line described above for email.
• Mail: Address to Gerard S. Poliquin,
Secretary of the Board, National Credit
Union Administration, 1775 Duke
Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314–
3428.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as
mail address.
Public inspection: You may view all
public comments on NCUA’s Web site
at https://www.ncua.gov/regulationsupervision/Pages/rules/proposed.aspx
as submitted, except for those we cannot
post for technical reasons. NCUA will
not edit or remove any identifying or
contact information from the public
comments submitted. You may inspect
paper copies of comments in NCUA’s
law library at 1775 Duke Street,
Alexandria, Virginia 22314, by
appointment weekdays between 9 a.m.
and 3 p.m. To make an appointment,
call (703) 518–6546 or send an email to
OGCMail@ncua.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas I. Zells, Staff Attorney, Office of
General Counsel, or Amanda Parkhill,
Loss/Risk Analysis Officer, Office of
Examination and Insurance, at 1775
Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314 or
telephone: (703) 548–2478 (Mr. Zells) or
(703) 518–6385 (Ms. Parkhill).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Summary of the Proposed Rule
III. Regulatory Procedures
I. Background
Credit unions that experience a sharp
decline in net worth have a much higher
likelihood of failing. From the second
quarter of 1996 through the second
quarter of 2016, there were 11,734
federally insured credit unions. As
shown by the table below, 2,502 of these
credit unions fell below the wellcapitalized threshold (7 percent net
worth ratio) after having a net worth
ratio above that threshold for at least
one quarter. The net worth ratio of 490
of these 2,502 credit unions eventually
fell below two percent. Importantly,
only 15 percent of those credit unions
whose net worth dropped below two
percent sometime in this period remain
active.
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
35494
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 145 / Monday, July 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—CREDIT UNIONS FALLING BELOW CRITICAL NET WORTH RATIO THRESHOLDS
Number of
CUs
Net worth ratio fell:
sradovich on DSKBCFCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Below
Below
Below
Below
Below
Below
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
.....................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................................
Credit union failures are costly to the
entire credit union system through their
effect on the National Credit Union
Share Insurance Fund (NCUSIF). NCUA,
as a prudential safety and soundness
regulator, is charged with protecting the
safety and soundness of the credit union
system and, in turn, the NCUSIF and the
taxpayer through regulation and
supervision.1 One way to mitigate some
of the cost to the NCUSIF and minimize
disruption to credit union members is to
find appropriate merger partners for atrisk credit unions.
Under the emergency merger
provision of section 205(h) of the FCU
Act, the Board may allow a credit union
that is either insolvent or in danger of
insolvency to merge with another credit
union if the Board finds that: (1) An
emergency requiring expeditious action
exists; (2) no other reasonable
alternatives are available; and (3) the
action is in the public interest.2 Under
these circumstances, the Board may
approve an emergency merger without
regard to common bond or other legal
constraints, such as obtaining the
approval of the members of the merging
credit union. The emergency merger
statute addresses exigent circumstances
and is intended to serve the public
interest and credit union members by
providing for the continuation of credit
union services to members and by
preserving credit union assets and the
NCUSIF.
To take such action, NCUA must first
determine that a credit union is either
insolvent or in danger of insolvency
before the agency can make the
additional findings that an emergency
exists, other alternatives are not
reasonably available, and the public
interest would be served by the merger.
The FCU Act, however, does not define
when a credit union is ‘‘in danger of
insolvency.’’
In 2009, NCUA proposed a definition
of in danger of insolvency to establish
an objective standard to aid it in making
in danger of insolvency
determinations.3 In doing so, NCUA
aimed to provide certainty and
consistency regarding how it interprets
the in danger of insolvency standard. In
2010, NCUA finalized the 2009
proposed definition, which provided for
the above-referenced three net worth
categories, and it remains the current
definition.4
Experience gained since 2010,
including the analysis of Call Reports
and other NCUA internal data, have led
the Board to conclude that an update to
the current definition of in danger of
insolvency is needed.
1 NCUA’s mission is to ‘‘provide, through
regulation and supervision, a safe and sound credit
union system, which promotes confidence in the
national system of cooperative credit.’’ https://
www.ncua.gov/About/Pages/Mission-andVision.aspx.
2 12 U.S.C. 1785(h).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:29 Jul 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
II. Summary of the Proposed Rule
A. Overview
The current definition of in danger of
insolvency requires a credit union to fall
into at least one of three net worth
categories to be found to be in danger
of insolvency. The Board believes it
necessary to amend the current
definition in three ways.
First, the Board proposes to lengthen
by six months the ‘‘forecast horizons,’’
the time periods in which NCUA
projects a credit union’s net worth for
determining if it is in danger of
insolvency. This change would apply to
two of the three current categories. It
would result in forecast horizons of 30
months for the insolvency (zero net
worth) category, up from 24 months,
and 18 months for the critically
undercapitalized (under two percent net
worth) category, up from 12 months.
The third category of the current
definition, in which a credit union is
significantly undercapitalized and
NCUA determines there is no reasonable
prospect of the credit union becoming
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2,502
1,563
1,126
825
647
490
Active
1,104
475
254
151
102
73
Active
(%)
44
30
23
18
16
15
adequately capitalized in the succeeding
36 months, would remain unchanged.
The second change the Board
proposes is the addition of a fourth
category to the definition. Specifically,
a credit union would be considered in
danger of insolvency if it had been
granted or received assistance under
section 208 of the FCU Act in the 15
months prior to the Region’s
determination that the credit union is in
danger of insolvency.
Finally, the Board proposes to make a
technical spelling correction to the first
category of the definition to replace the
word ‘‘relay’’ with the word ‘‘rely’’.
The Board believes the proposed
changes to the current definition would
provide NCUA with a more appropriate
degree of flexibility and better allow
NCUA to act when the statutory criteria
for an emergency merger are met,
namely an emergency requiring
expeditious action exists, no other
reasonable alternatives are available,
and the action is in the public interest.5
As detailed below, both the experience
NCUA has gained in applying the
current definition and quantitative data
have persuaded the Board that the
proposed changes are necessary. Under
the time frames of the current
definition, NCUA has, on several
occasions, been prevented from
instituting an emergency merger
because a struggling credit union had
not yet met the regulatory time frames
to be considered in danger of
insolvency, although it had otherwise
met the statutory criteria. The lack of
flexibility in the current rule can result
in continued decline in the health of a
credit union, leading to a reduction in
member services as the institution
moves towards resolution. As shown in
the chart below, credit union loan
growth declines in the quarters leading
up to an emergency merger.
3 74
FR 68722 (Dec. 29, 2009).
FR 36257 (June 25, 2010).
5 12 U.S.C. 1785(h).
4 75
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 145 / Monday, July 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSKBCFCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Extending the Forecast Horizons
The Board proposes to amend the
definition of in danger of insolvency in
the glossary to appendix B to part 701
to extend the forecast horizons, the time
periods in which NCUA must project
whether a credit union will become
insolvent or critically undercapitalized.
Currently, to be deemed in danger of
insolvency under the definition’s first
two categories, NCUA must project a
credit union’s future net worth will
decline at a rate that will either render
the credit union insolvent within 24
months or drop below two percent
(critically undercapitalized) within 12
months. The Board proposes to extend
these periods to 30 months and 18
months, respectively. The Board intends
to leave as is the forecast horizon of the
third category of the definition
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:29 Jul 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
pertaining to significantly
undercapitalized credit unions that
NCUA projects have no reasonable
prospect of becoming adequately
capitalized in the succeeding 36
months.
The Board believes that these
proposed changes to the definition will
capture more credit unions that are in
danger of insolvency earlier in their
decline, before their net worth declines
most rapidly, and will provide value to
both the members of the credit union
being merged and the NCUSIF.
Increasing the likelihood that a
distressed credit union would be
eligible for an emergency merger earlier
could help to protect net worth, reduce
payouts on deposit insurance or merger
assistance, and improve merger
prospects. The proposed changes also
provide NCUA with additional
flexibility to resolve the distressed
credit union through a merger and help
to better ensure continuity of financial
services for members. This additional
flexibility is especially beneficial when
circumstances deplete a credit union’s
capital slowly and steadily rather than
abruptly, such as in the case of an
institution with a large portfolio of
declining illiquid assets.
To evaluate the benefit of shifting the
critically undercapitalized threshold
from 12 to 18 months and the
insolvency threshold from 24 to 30
months, NCUA used a simple forecast of
the net worth ratios of 46 credit unions
that underwent an emergency merger
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
between the second quarter of 2010,
when the current in danger of
insolvency definition was put into
place, and the fourth quarter of 2016.6
Of the 46 credit unions that underwent
an emergency merger since the rule was
previously revised by the NCUA Board,
11 credit unions with total assets of
$812 million would have qualified for
an emergency merger earlier under the
proposed definition of in danger of
insolvency. The 11 credit unions had
$12 million more in net worth at the
time the credit unions first qualified
under the proposed definition compared
with the 2010 definition. The $12
million additional net worth meant the
credit unions had net worth ratios 1 to
3 percentage points higher. Also, the
longer forecast horizon allows NCUA to
identify a significant number of
additional potential credit union
emergency merger candidates. The
largest diagnostic improvements from
extending the forecast horizon occur in
6 This simple hypothetical forecast was used
exclusively for purposes of analyzing emergency
merger data and forecast horizons. It is not
representative of, and does not limit, how NCUA
projects credit unions to meet the established and
proposed in danger of insolvency categories. The
forecast of the net worth ratio uses the change in
the net worth ratio during the most recently
available four quarters and projects that change in
net worth through the forecast horizon for each
threshold. In other words, NCUA calculated
whether the credit union would fall below either of
the critical thresholds using a simple straight line
projection approach, with the projected rate of
decline in net worth equal to the most recently
available four-quarter change.
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
EP31JY17.000
In some instances, the rigidity of the
current regulatory definition
unnecessarily limits NCUA’s ability to
resolve failing institutions. This comes
at a greater cost to a credit union’s
members and the NCUSIF, particularly
in the case of an eventual liquidation.
The FCU Act grants the Board broad
authority to define the term ‘‘in danger
of insolvency’’ for emergency merger
purposes. The Board believes that the
proposed definition increases agency
flexibility and will enable NCUA to act
more timely to preserve credit union
services and credit union assets and to
protect the safety and soundness of the
credit union system and the NCUSIF.
35495
35496
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 145 / Monday, July 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
credit unions are estimated to be below
the critically undercapitalized threshold
within 18 months. The identification of
these additional credit unions represent
an opportunity for NCUA to preserve
services to members and member assets
through the emergency merger process
prior to the quarters when the net worth
of these credit unions declines the most.
As the chart below illustrates, credit
union net worth generally declines the
most in the quarters leading up to an
emergency merger.
The data closely aligns with the views
and experiences of NCUA. The agency
has found that the current forecast
horizons for these two categories can
result in the unnecessary delay or even
rejection of emergency merger requests
that do not meet the current regulatory
definition of in danger of insolvency,
but would otherwise meet the statutory
criteria for an emergency merger. NCUA
believes that extending these forecast
horizons will lessen the potential for
such occurrences. When a credit union
cannot be timely merged through an
emergency merger and no other credit
unions with compatible fields of
membership submit a merger proposal,
NCUA must consider alternative and
usually less desirable means of
resolution. These less desirable means
of resolution could even include the
liquidation of the credit union. In
general, merging a credit union into
another institution is more desirable
than liquidating the credit union
because a merger is generally lower cost
to the NCUSIF and provides continued
and, in most cases, expanded service to
the membership.
NCUA believes that the delay
associated with waiting for an
institution to deteriorate to the point
where it satisfies the current regulatory
definition of in danger of insolvency has
too frequently resulted in struggling
institutions being allowed to deteriorate
over time to the point where they are no
longer viable merger partners and have
to be resolved by means that are more
costly to the NCUSIF and more
disruptive to the members. Rather than
continue to operate under the current
definition, which hampers NCUA’s
ability to take responsible supervisory
action on a timely basis and ensure the
safety and soundness of the credit union
system, the Board proposes to amend
the regulatory definition of in danger of
insolvency to facilitate those mergers
that satisfy the statutory requirements.
As stated above, the Board proposes
to leave the forecast horizon for the
third category of the current definition
as is. Rather than establishing a time
period in which credit unions are
projected to decline to a certain point,
as the other two categories do, the third
category only allows NCUA to find that
a credit union is in danger of insolvency
if the credit union has no reasonable
prospect of improving its net worth
from the significantly undercapitalized
level to the adequately capitalized level
in the succeeding 36 months. The Board
believes that the current forecast
horizon for this category already
provides credit unions significant time
to become adequately capitalized and is
concerned that any extension to the
forecast horizon would make it
exceedingly difficult to accurately
determine if a credit union has a
reasonable possibility of returning its
net worth to the adequately capitalized
level.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:29 Jul 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
C. Section 208 Assistance
The Board proposes to expand the
definition of in danger of insolvency in
the glossary to appendix B to part 701
to add a fourth category that provides
that a credit union will satisfy the
definition of in danger of insolvency if
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
EP31JY17.001
sradovich on DSKBCFCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
the two quarters prior to an emergency
merger. Instead of 31% of the credit
unions estimated to be below the
critically undercapitalized threshold
within 12 months two quarters before
the emergency merger and 50% one
quarter before, 42% and 58% of the
35497
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 145 / Monday, July 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
the credit union has been granted or
received assistance under section 208 of
the FCU Act in the 15 months prior to
the Region making such determination.
Section 208 allows the Board to provide
special assistance to credit unions to
avoid liquidation.
In analyzing credit union Call Reports
and other internal NCUA data, NCUA
has found that an overwhelming
number of credit unions that received
section 208 assistance eventually left
the credit union system. Between the
first quarter of 2001 and the fourth
quarter of 2016, 181 credit unions
received at least one type of section 208
assistance. Since then, 165, or 91.2%, of
these credit unions have stopped filing
Call Reports.
Further, the data shows that not only
did the overwhelming majority of the
credit unions that received section 208
assistance stop filing Call Reports, but
did so not long after, or prior to,
receiving the assistance. Notably, 13.9%
of the total number of credit unions that
received section 208 assistance began
receiving such assistance after they filed
their final Call Report. An additional
37.0% of these 165 credit unions filed
their final Call Report in the same
quarter in which they first began
receiving section 208 assistance.
Another 41.2% of these credit unions
filed their final Call Report within the
four quarters after the quarter they first
received section 208 assistance. In total,
152 of the 165 credit unions, or 92.1%,
stopped filing Call Reports prior to or
within 15 months of receiving the
section 208 assistance.
CREDIT UNIONS RECEIVING SECTION 208 ASSISTANCE: FIRST RECEIPT OF SECTION 208 ASSISTANCE TO LAST CALL
REPORT FILED
Number
Percent
Same quarter ...........................................................................................................................................................
1 year .......................................................................................................................................................................
2 years .....................................................................................................................................................................
3 years .....................................................................................................................................................................
4 or more years .......................................................................................................................................................
Assistance began after final call report was filed ....................................................................................................
61
68
3
2
8
23
37.0
41.2
1.8
1.2
4.8
13.9
Total ..................................................................................................................................................................
165
100.0
The quantitative evidence, along with
NCUA’s experiences and observations,
demonstrate that credit unions receiving
section 208 assistance within the last 15
months are in danger of insolvency for
emergency merger purposes.
It must be noted that the Board is not
proposing that every credit union that
receives section 208 assistance, thus
meeting the proposed definition of in
danger of insolvency, is destined for an
emergency merger. The emergency
merger statute addresses exigent
circumstances. Credit unions to be
merged on an emergency basis still must
meet the statutory requirements that an
emergency exists, other alternatives are
not reasonably available, and the public
interest would be served by the merger.7
However, quantitative evidence and
NCUA’s experience do indicate that a
credit union’s receipt of section 208
assistance is a reliable indicator of a
credit union being in danger of
insolvency and a safety and soundness
concern.
III. Regulatory Procedures
sradovich on DSKBCFCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
A. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires that, in connection
with a notice of proposed rulemaking,
an agency prepare and make available
for public comment an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis that describes the
impact of a proposed rule on small
entities. A regulatory flexibility analysis
is not required, however, if the agency
certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
(defined for purposes of the RFA to
include credit unions with assets less
than $100 million) and publishes its
certification and a short, explanatory
statement in the Federal Register
together with the rule. The proposed
rule merely provides NCUA greater
flexibility to authorize emergency
mergers and will not have an impact on
small credit unions. Accordingly, NCUA
certifies that the proposed rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small credit
unions.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA) applies to rulemakings in which
an agency creates a new or amends
existing information collection
requirements.8 For the purpose of the
PRA, an information collection
requirement may take the form of a
reporting, recordkeeping, or a thirdparty disclosure requirement. The
proposed rule does not contain
information collection requirements that
require approval by OMB under the
PRA.9 The proposed rule would merely
8 44
7 12
U.S.C. 1785(h).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:43 Jul 28, 2017
9 44
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
U.S.C. 3507(d); 5 CFR part 1320.
U.S.C. Chap. 35.
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
provide NCUA greater flexibility to
authorize emergency mergers.
C. Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132 encourages
independent regulatory agencies to
consider the impact of their actions on
state and local interests. In adherence to
fundamental federalism principles,
NCUA, an independent regulatory
agency as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5),
voluntarily complies with the executive
order. This rulemaking will not have a
substantial direct effect on the states, on
the connection between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. NCUA has
determined that this proposal does not
constitute a policy that has federalism
implications for purposes of the
executive order.
D. Assessment of Federal Regulations
and Policies on Families
NCUA has determined that this final
rule will not affect family well-being
within the meaning of Section 654 of
the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999.10
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 701
Credit, Credit unions, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
10 Public
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
Law 105–277, 112 Stat. 2681 (1998).
31JYP1
35498
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 145 / Monday, July 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
By the National Credit Union
Administration Board on July 20, 2017.
Gerard Poliquin,
Secretary of the Board.
the Region’s determination that the
credit union is in danger of insolvency.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–15685 Filed 7–28–17; 8:45 am]
For the reasons discussed above, the
NCUA Board proposes to amend 12 CFR
part 701 as follows:
BILLING CODE 7535–01–P
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
PART 701—ORGANIZATION AND
OPERATION OF FEDERAL CREDIT
UNIONS
41 CFR Chapters 101 and 102
■
1. The authority citation for part 701
is revised to read as follows:
[Notice–MA–2017–03; Docket 2017–0002;
Sequence No. 7]
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1752(5), 1755, 1756,
1757, 1758, 1759, 1761a, 1761b, 1766, 1767,
1782, 1784, 1785, 1786, 1787, 1788, 1789.
Section 701.6 is also authorized by 15 U.S.C.
3717. Section 701.31 is also authorized by 15
U.S.C. 1601 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 1981 and 3601–
3610. Section 701.35 is also authorized by 42
U.S.C. 4311–4312.
Evaluation of Existing Federal
Management and Federal Property
Management Regulations; Extension
of Comment Period
2. Revise the definition of ‘‘in danger
of insolvency’’ in Appendix 1 (Glossary)
to appendix B to part 701 to read as
follows:
*
*
*
*
*
In danger of insolvency—In making
the determination that a particular
credit union is in danger of insolvency,
NCUA will establish that the credit
union falls into one or more of the
following categories:
1. The credit union’s net worth is
declining at a rate that will render it
insolvent within 30 months. In
projecting future net worth, NCUA may
rely on data in addition to Call Report
data. The trend must be supported by at
least 12 months of historic data.
2. The credit union’s net worth is
declining at a rate that will take it under
two percent (2%) net worth within 18
months. In projecting future net worth,
NCUA may rely on data in addition to
Call Report data. The trend must be
supported by at least 12 months of
historic data.
3. The credit union’s net worth, as
self-reported on its Call Report, is
significantly undercapitalized, and
NCUA determines that there is no
reasonable prospect of the credit union
becoming adequately capitalized in the
succeeding 36 months. In making its
determination on the prospect of
achieving adequate capitalization,
NCUA will assume that, if adverse
economic conditions are affecting the
value of the credit union’s assets and
liabilities, including property values
and loan delinquencies related to
unemployment, these adverse
conditions will not further deteriorate.
4. The credit union has been granted
or received assistance under section 208
of the Federal Credit Union Act, 12
U.S.C. 1788, in the 15 months prior to
sradovich on DSKBCFCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:29 Jul 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
General Services
Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Request for comments;
extension of comment period.
AGENCY:
GSA issued a request on May
30, 2017 seeking input by July 31, 2017.
The comment period is extended until
August 14, 2017, to provide additional
time for interested parties to review and
submit comments on the request.
DATES: The comment period for the
document published in the Federal
Register at 82 FR 24651, May 30, 2017,
is extended for 14 days.
Comment Date: Interested parties
should submit comments to the
Regulatory Secretariat at one of the
addresses shown below on or before
August 14, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by ‘‘Notice–MA–2017–03,
Evaluation of Existing Federal
Management and Federal Property
Regulations’’ by any of the following
methods:
• Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
searching for Notice–MA–2017–03,
Evaluation of Existing Regulations.
Select the link ‘‘Comment Now’’ that
corresponds with ‘‘Notice–MA–2017–
03, Evaluation of Existing Federal
Management and Federal Property
Management Regulations.’’ Follow the
instructions provided on the screen.
Please include your name, company
name (if applicable), and ‘‘Notice–MA–
2017–03, Evaluation of Existing Federal
Management and Federal Property
Management Regulations’’ on your
attached document.
• Google form found at: https://
goo.gl/forms/EzesI5HeTP7SGZpD3.
If you are commenting via the google
form, please note that each regulation or
part that you are identifying for repeal,
replacement or modification should be
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
entered into the form separately. This
will assist GSA in its tracking and
analysis of the comments received.
• Mail: General Services
Administration, Regulatory Secretariat
Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20405.
GSA requests that comments be as
specific as possible, include any
supporting data, detailed justification
for your proposal, or other information
such as cost information, provide a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) or
Federal Register (FR) citation when
referencing a specific regulation, and
provide specific suggestions regarding
repeal, replacement or modification.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Bob Holcombe, Director, Personal
Property, Office of Government-wide
Policy, 202–501–3828 or via email at
robert.holcombe@gsa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: GSA
published a request in the Federal
Register at 82 FR 24651, May 30, 2017
seeking input on federal management
and federal property management
regulations. The comment period is
extended to provide additional time for
interested parties to the review and
submit comments on the request.
Dated: July 18, 2017.
Michael Downing,
Regulatory Reform Officer, Office of the
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017–15457 Filed 7–28–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–14–P
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
41 CFR Subtitle F
[Notice–MA–2017–02; Docket 2017–0002;
Sequence No. 5]
Federal Travel Regulation System;
Evaluation of Existing Federal Travel
Regulation; Extension of Comment
Period
General Services
Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Request for comments;
extension of comment period.
AGENCY:
GSA issued a document on
May 30, 2017 seeking input by July 31,
2017. The comment period is extended
to provide additional time for interested
parties to review and submit comments
on the document.
DATES: The comment period for the
document published in the Federal
Register at 82 FR 24652, published on
May 30, 2017, is extended until August
14, 2017.
Comment Date: Interested parties
should submit comments to the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 145 (Monday, July 31, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35493-35498]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15685]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION
12 CFR Part 701
RIN 3133-AE76
Emergency Mergers--Chartering and Field of Membership
AGENCY: National Credit Union Administration (NCUA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The NCUA Board (Board) proposes to amend in its Chartering and
Field of Membership Manual the definition of the term ``in danger of
insolvency'' for emergency merger purposes. The current definition
requires a credit union to fall into at least one of three net worth
categories over a period of time to be ``in danger of insolvency.'' For
two of the three categories, the Board proposes to lengthen by six
months the forecast horizons, the time period in which NCUA projects a
credit union's net worth will decline to the point that it falls into
one of the categories. This will extend the time period in which a
credit union's net worth is projected to either render it insolvent or
drop below two percent from 24 to 30 months and from 12 to 18 months,
respectively. Additionally, the Board proposes to add a fourth category
to the three existing net worth categories to include credit unions
that have been granted or received assistance under section 208 of the
Federal Credit Union Act (FCU Act) in the 15 months prior to the
Region's determination that the credit union is in danger of
insolvency.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 29, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any 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: https://www.ncua.gov/regulation-supervision/Pages/rules/proposed.aspx. Follow the instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: Address to regcomments@ncua.gov. Include ``[Your
name] Comments on Proposed Rule 701, In Danger of Insolvency
Definition'' in the email subject line.
Fax: (703) 518-6319. Use the subject line described above
for email.
Mail: Address to Gerard S. Poliquin, Secretary of the
Board, National Credit Union Administration, 1775 Duke Street,
Alexandria, Virginia 22314-3428.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as mail address.
Public inspection: You may view all public comments on NCUA's Web
site at https://www.ncua.gov/regulation-supervision/Pages/rules/proposed.aspx as submitted, except for those we cannot post for
technical reasons. NCUA will not edit or remove any identifying or
contact information from the public comments submitted. You may inspect
paper copies of comments in NCUA's law library at 1775 Duke Street,
Alexandria, Virginia 22314, by appointment weekdays between 9 a.m. and
3 p.m. To make an appointment, call (703) 518-6546 or send an email to
OGCMail@ncua.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas I. Zells, Staff Attorney,
Office of General Counsel, or Amanda Parkhill, Loss/Risk Analysis
Officer, Office of Examination and Insurance, at 1775 Duke Street,
Alexandria, VA 22314 or telephone: (703) 548-2478 (Mr. Zells) or (703)
518-6385 (Ms. Parkhill).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Summary of the Proposed Rule
III. Regulatory Procedures
I. Background
Credit unions that experience a sharp decline in net worth have a
much higher likelihood of failing. From the second quarter of 1996
through the second quarter of 2016, there were 11,734 federally insured
credit unions. As shown by the table below, 2,502 of these credit
unions fell below the well-capitalized threshold (7 percent net worth
ratio) after having a net worth ratio above that threshold for at least
one quarter. The net worth ratio of 490 of these 2,502 credit unions
eventually fell below two percent. Importantly, only 15 percent of
those credit unions whose net worth dropped below two percent sometime
in this period remain active.
[[Page 35494]]
Table 1--Credit Unions Falling Below Critical Net Worth Ratio Thresholds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net worth ratio fell: Number of CUs Active Active (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below 7%........................................................ 2,502 1,104 44
Below 6%........................................................ 1,563 475 30
Below 5%........................................................ 1,126 254 23
Below 4%........................................................ 825 151 18
Below 3%........................................................ 647 102 16
Below 2%........................................................ 490 73 15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credit union failures are costly to the entire credit union system
through their effect on the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund
(NCUSIF). NCUA, as a prudential safety and soundness regulator, is
charged with protecting the safety and soundness of the credit union
system and, in turn, the NCUSIF and the taxpayer through regulation and
supervision.\1\ One way to mitigate some of the cost to the NCUSIF and
minimize disruption to credit union members is to find appropriate
merger partners for at-risk credit unions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NCUA's mission is to ``provide, through regulation and
supervision, a safe and sound credit union system, which promotes
confidence in the national system of cooperative credit.'' https://www.ncua.gov/About/Pages/Mission-and-Vision.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the emergency merger provision of section 205(h) of the FCU
Act, the Board may allow a credit union that is either insolvent or in
danger of insolvency to merge with another credit union if the Board
finds that: (1) An emergency requiring expeditious action exists; (2)
no other reasonable alternatives are available; and (3) the action is
in the public interest.\2\ Under these circumstances, the Board may
approve an emergency merger without regard to common bond or other
legal constraints, such as obtaining the approval of the members of the
merging credit union. The emergency merger statute addresses exigent
circumstances and is intended to serve the public interest and credit
union members by providing for the continuation of credit union
services to members and by preserving credit union assets and the
NCUSIF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 12 U.S.C. 1785(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To take such action, NCUA must first determine that a credit union
is either insolvent or in danger of insolvency before the agency can
make the additional findings that an emergency exists, other
alternatives are not reasonably available, and the public interest
would be served by the merger. The FCU Act, however, does not define
when a credit union is ``in danger of insolvency.''
In 2009, NCUA proposed a definition of in danger of insolvency to
establish an objective standard to aid it in making in danger of
insolvency determinations.\3\ In doing so, NCUA aimed to provide
certainty and consistency regarding how it interprets the in danger of
insolvency standard. In 2010, NCUA finalized the 2009 proposed
definition, which provided for the above-referenced three net worth
categories, and it remains the current definition.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 74 FR 68722 (Dec. 29, 2009).
\4\ 75 FR 36257 (June 25, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Experience gained since 2010, including the analysis of Call
Reports and other NCUA internal data, have led the Board to conclude
that an update to the current definition of in danger of insolvency is
needed.
II. Summary of the Proposed Rule
A. Overview
The current definition of in danger of insolvency requires a credit
union to fall into at least one of three net worth categories to be
found to be in danger of insolvency. The Board believes it necessary to
amend the current definition in three ways.
First, the Board proposes to lengthen by six months the ``forecast
horizons,'' the time periods in which NCUA projects a credit union's
net worth for determining if it is in danger of insolvency. This change
would apply to two of the three current categories. It would result in
forecast horizons of 30 months for the insolvency (zero net worth)
category, up from 24 months, and 18 months for the critically
undercapitalized (under two percent net worth) category, up from 12
months. The third category of the current definition, in which a credit
union is significantly undercapitalized and NCUA determines there is no
reasonable prospect of the credit union becoming adequately capitalized
in the succeeding 36 months, would remain unchanged.
The second change the Board proposes is the addition of a fourth
category to the definition. Specifically, a credit union would be
considered in danger of insolvency if it had been granted or received
assistance under section 208 of the FCU Act in the 15 months prior to
the Region's determination that the credit union is in danger of
insolvency.
Finally, the Board proposes to make a technical spelling correction
to the first category of the definition to replace the word ``relay''
with the word ``rely''.
The Board believes the proposed changes to the current definition
would provide NCUA with a more appropriate degree of flexibility and
better allow NCUA to act when the statutory criteria for an emergency
merger are met, namely an emergency requiring expeditious action
exists, no other reasonable alternatives are available, and the action
is in the public interest.\5\ As detailed below, both the experience
NCUA has gained in applying the current definition and quantitative
data have persuaded the Board that the proposed changes are necessary.
Under the time frames of the current definition, NCUA has, on several
occasions, been prevented from instituting an emergency merger because
a struggling credit union had not yet met the regulatory time frames to
be considered in danger of insolvency, although it had otherwise met
the statutory criteria. The lack of flexibility in the current rule can
result in continued decline in the health of a credit union, leading to
a reduction in member services as the institution moves towards
resolution. As shown in the chart below, credit union loan growth
declines in the quarters leading up to an emergency merger.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 12 U.S.C. 1785(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 35495]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP31JY17.000
In some instances, the rigidity of the current regulatory
definition unnecessarily limits NCUA's ability to resolve failing
institutions. This comes at a greater cost to a credit union's members
and the NCUSIF, particularly in the case of an eventual liquidation.
The FCU Act grants the Board broad authority to define the term ``in
danger of insolvency'' for emergency merger purposes. The Board
believes that the proposed definition increases agency flexibility and
will enable NCUA to act more timely to preserve credit union services
and credit union assets and to protect the safety and soundness of the
credit union system and the NCUSIF.
B. Extending the Forecast Horizons
The Board proposes to amend the definition of in danger of
insolvency in the glossary to appendix B to part 701 to extend the
forecast horizons, the time periods in which NCUA must project whether
a credit union will become insolvent or critically undercapitalized.
Currently, to be deemed in danger of insolvency under the definition's
first two categories, NCUA must project a credit union's future net
worth will decline at a rate that will either render the credit union
insolvent within 24 months or drop below two percent (critically
undercapitalized) within 12 months. The Board proposes to extend these
periods to 30 months and 18 months, respectively. The Board intends to
leave as is the forecast horizon of the third category of the
definition pertaining to significantly undercapitalized credit unions
that NCUA projects have no reasonable prospect of becoming adequately
capitalized in the succeeding 36 months.
The Board believes that these proposed changes to the definition
will capture more credit unions that are in danger of insolvency
earlier in their decline, before their net worth declines most rapidly,
and will provide value to both the members of the credit union being
merged and the NCUSIF. Increasing the likelihood that a distressed
credit union would be eligible for an emergency merger earlier could
help to protect net worth, reduce payouts on deposit insurance or
merger assistance, and improve merger prospects. The proposed changes
also provide NCUA with additional flexibility to resolve the distressed
credit union through a merger and help to better ensure continuity of
financial services for members. This additional flexibility is
especially beneficial when circumstances deplete a credit union's
capital slowly and steadily rather than abruptly, such as in the case
of an institution with a large portfolio of declining illiquid assets.
To evaluate the benefit of shifting the critically undercapitalized
threshold from 12 to 18 months and the insolvency threshold from 24 to
30 months, NCUA used a simple forecast of the net worth ratios of 46
credit unions that underwent an emergency merger between the second
quarter of 2010, when the current in danger of insolvency definition
was put into place, and the fourth quarter of 2016.\6\ Of the 46 credit
unions that underwent an emergency merger since the rule was previously
revised by the NCUA Board, 11 credit unions with total assets of $812
million would have qualified for an emergency merger earlier under the
proposed definition of in danger of insolvency. The 11 credit unions
had $12 million more in net worth at the time the credit unions first
qualified under the proposed definition compared with the 2010
definition. The $12 million additional net worth meant the credit
unions had net worth ratios 1 to 3 percentage points higher. Also, the
longer forecast horizon allows NCUA to identify a significant number of
additional potential credit union emergency merger candidates. The
largest diagnostic improvements from extending the forecast horizon
occur in
[[Page 35496]]
the two quarters prior to an emergency merger. Instead of 31% of the
credit unions estimated to be below the critically undercapitalized
threshold within 12 months two quarters before the emergency merger and
50% one quarter before, 42% and 58% of the credit unions are estimated
to be below the critically undercapitalized threshold within 18 months.
The identification of these additional credit unions represent an
opportunity for NCUA to preserve services to members and member assets
through the emergency merger process prior to the quarters when the net
worth of these credit unions declines the most. As the chart below
illustrates, credit union net worth generally declines the most in the
quarters leading up to an emergency merger.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ This simple hypothetical forecast was used exclusively for
purposes of analyzing emergency merger data and forecast horizons.
It is not representative of, and does not limit, how NCUA projects
credit unions to meet the established and proposed in danger of
insolvency categories. The forecast of the net worth ratio uses the
change in the net worth ratio during the most recently available
four quarters and projects that change in net worth through the
forecast horizon for each threshold. In other words, NCUA calculated
whether the credit union would fall below either of the critical
thresholds using a simple straight line projection approach, with
the projected rate of decline in net worth equal to the most
recently available four-quarter change.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP31JY17.001
The data closely aligns with the views and experiences of NCUA. The
agency has found that the current forecast horizons for these two
categories can result in the unnecessary delay or even rejection of
emergency merger requests that do not meet the current regulatory
definition of in danger of insolvency, but would otherwise meet the
statutory criteria for an emergency merger. NCUA believes that
extending these forecast horizons will lessen the potential for such
occurrences. When a credit union cannot be timely merged through an
emergency merger and no other credit unions with compatible fields of
membership submit a merger proposal, NCUA must consider alternative and
usually less desirable means of resolution. These less desirable means
of resolution could even include the liquidation of the credit union.
In general, merging a credit union into another institution is more
desirable than liquidating the credit union because a merger is
generally lower cost to the NCUSIF and provides continued and, in most
cases, expanded service to the membership.
NCUA believes that the delay associated with waiting for an
institution to deteriorate to the point where it satisfies the current
regulatory definition of in danger of insolvency has too frequently
resulted in struggling institutions being allowed to deteriorate over
time to the point where they are no longer viable merger partners and
have to be resolved by means that are more costly to the NCUSIF and
more disruptive to the members. Rather than continue to operate under
the current definition, which hampers NCUA's ability to take
responsible supervisory action on a timely basis and ensure the safety
and soundness of the credit union system, the Board proposes to amend
the regulatory definition of in danger of insolvency to facilitate
those mergers that satisfy the statutory requirements.
As stated above, the Board proposes to leave the forecast horizon
for the third category of the current definition as is. Rather than
establishing a time period in which credit unions are projected to
decline to a certain point, as the other two categories do, the third
category only allows NCUA to find that a credit union is in danger of
insolvency if the credit union has no reasonable prospect of improving
its net worth from the significantly undercapitalized level to the
adequately capitalized level in the succeeding 36 months. The Board
believes that the current forecast horizon for this category already
provides credit unions significant time to become adequately
capitalized and is concerned that any extension to the forecast horizon
would make it exceedingly difficult to accurately determine if a credit
union has a reasonable possibility of returning its net worth to the
adequately capitalized level.
C. Section 208 Assistance
The Board proposes to expand the definition of in danger of
insolvency in the glossary to appendix B to part 701 to add a fourth
category that provides that a credit union will satisfy the definition
of in danger of insolvency if
[[Page 35497]]
the credit union has been granted or received assistance under section
208 of the FCU Act in the 15 months prior to the Region making such
determination. Section 208 allows the Board to provide special
assistance to credit unions to avoid liquidation.
In analyzing credit union Call Reports and other internal NCUA
data, NCUA has found that an overwhelming number of credit unions that
received section 208 assistance eventually left the credit union
system. Between the first quarter of 2001 and the fourth quarter of
2016, 181 credit unions received at least one type of section 208
assistance. Since then, 165, or 91.2%, of these credit unions have
stopped filing Call Reports.
Further, the data shows that not only did the overwhelming majority
of the credit unions that received section 208 assistance stop filing
Call Reports, but did so not long after, or prior to, receiving the
assistance. Notably, 13.9% of the total number of credit unions that
received section 208 assistance began receiving such assistance after
they filed their final Call Report. An additional 37.0% of these 165
credit unions filed their final Call Report in the same quarter in
which they first began receiving section 208 assistance. Another 41.2%
of these credit unions filed their final Call Report within the four
quarters after the quarter they first received section 208 assistance.
In total, 152 of the 165 credit unions, or 92.1%, stopped filing Call
Reports prior to or within 15 months of receiving the section 208
assistance.
Credit Unions Receiving Section 208 Assistance: First Receipt of Section
208 Assistance to Last Call Report Filed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Same quarter............................ 61 37.0
1 year.................................. 68 41.2
2 years................................. 3 1.8
3 years................................. 2 1.2
4 or more years......................... 8 4.8
Assistance began after final call report 23 13.9
was filed..............................
-------------------------------
Total............................... 165 100.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The quantitative evidence, along with NCUA's experiences and
observations, demonstrate that credit unions receiving section 208
assistance within the last 15 months are in danger of insolvency for
emergency merger purposes.
It must be noted that the Board is not proposing that every credit
union that receives section 208 assistance, thus meeting the proposed
definition of in danger of insolvency, is destined for an emergency
merger. The emergency merger statute addresses exigent circumstances.
Credit unions to be merged on an emergency basis still must meet the
statutory requirements that an emergency exists, other alternatives are
not reasonably available, and the public interest would be served by
the merger.\7\ However, quantitative evidence and NCUA's experience do
indicate that a credit union's receipt of section 208 assistance is a
reliable indicator of a credit union being in danger of insolvency and
a safety and soundness concern.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 12 U.S.C. 1785(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Regulatory Procedures
A. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires that, in
connection with a notice of proposed rulemaking, an agency prepare and
make available for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis that describes the impact of a proposed rule on small
entities. A regulatory flexibility analysis is not required, however,
if the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (defined for
purposes of the RFA to include credit unions with assets less than $100
million) and publishes its certification and a short, explanatory
statement in the Federal Register together with the rule. The proposed
rule merely provides NCUA greater flexibility to authorize emergency
mergers and will not have an impact on small credit unions.
Accordingly, NCUA certifies that the proposed rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small credit
unions.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) applies to rulemakings in
which an agency creates a new or amends existing information collection
requirements.\8\ For the purpose of the PRA, an information collection
requirement may take the form of a reporting, recordkeeping, or a
third-party disclosure requirement. The proposed rule does not contain
information collection requirements that require approval by OMB under
the PRA.\9\ The proposed rule would merely provide NCUA greater
flexibility to authorize emergency mergers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d); 5 CFR part 1320.
\9\ 44 U.S.C. Chap. 35.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132 encourages independent regulatory agencies to
consider the impact of their actions on state and local interests. In
adherence to fundamental federalism principles, NCUA, an independent
regulatory agency as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5), voluntarily complies
with the executive order. This rulemaking will not have a substantial
direct effect on the states, on the connection between the national
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. NCUA has
determined that this proposal does not constitute a policy that has
federalism implications for purposes of the executive order.
D. Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families
NCUA has determined that this final rule will not affect family
well-being within the meaning of Section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act, 1999.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681 (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 701
Credit, Credit unions, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
[[Page 35498]]
By the National Credit Union Administration Board on July 20,
2017.
Gerard Poliquin,
Secretary of the Board.
For the reasons discussed above, the NCUA Board proposes to amend
12 CFR part 701 as follows:
PART 701--ORGANIZATION AND OPERATION OF FEDERAL CREDIT UNIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 701 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1752(5), 1755, 1756, 1757, 1758, 1759,
1761a, 1761b, 1766, 1767, 1782, 1784, 1785, 1786, 1787, 1788, 1789.
Section 701.6 is also authorized by 15 U.S.C. 3717. Section 701.31
is also authorized by 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 1981 and
3601-3610. Section 701.35 is also authorized by 42 U.S.C. 4311-4312.
0
2. Revise the definition of ``in danger of insolvency'' in Appendix 1
(Glossary) to appendix B to part 701 to read as follows:
* * * * *
In danger of insolvency--In making the determination that a
particular credit union is in danger of insolvency, NCUA will establish
that the credit union falls into one or more of the following
categories:
1. The credit union's net worth is declining at a rate that will
render it insolvent within 30 months. In projecting future net worth,
NCUA may rely on data in addition to Call Report data. The trend must
be supported by at least 12 months of historic data.
2. The credit union's net worth is declining at a rate that will
take it under two percent (2%) net worth within 18 months. In
projecting future net worth, NCUA may rely on data in addition to Call
Report data. The trend must be supported by at least 12 months of
historic data.
3. The credit union's net worth, as self-reported on its Call
Report, is significantly undercapitalized, and NCUA determines that
there is no reasonable prospect of the credit union becoming adequately
capitalized in the succeeding 36 months. In making its determination on
the prospect of achieving adequate capitalization, NCUA will assume
that, if adverse economic conditions are affecting the value of the
credit union's assets and liabilities, including property values and
loan delinquencies related to unemployment, these adverse conditions
will not further deteriorate.
4. The credit union has been granted or received assistance under
section 208 of the Federal Credit Union Act, 12 U.S.C. 1788, in the 15
months prior to the Region's determination that the credit union is in
danger of insolvency.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-15685 Filed 7-28-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7535-01-P