Derivatives, 68487-68501 [2020-23968]
Download as PDF
68487
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 85, No. 210
Thursday, October 29, 2020
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION
ADMINISTRATION
12 CFR Part 701, 703, 741, and 746
RIN 3133–AF29
Derivatives
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
National Credit Union
Administration (NCUA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The NCUA Board (Board) is
proposing to amend the NCUA’s
Derivatives rule. This proposed rule is
intended to modernize the NCUA’s
Derivatives rule and make it more
principles-based. This proposal retains
key safety and soundness components,
while providing more flexibility for
federal credit unions (FCUs) to manage
their interest rate risk (IRR) through the
use of Derivatives. The changes
included in this proposal would
streamline the regulation and expand
credit unions’ authority to purchase and
use Derivatives for the purpose of
managing IRR. This proposal also
reorganizes rule content related to loan
pipeline management into one section,
which will aid in readability and clarity.
DATES: Comments must be received by
December 28, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written
comments, identified by RIN 3133–
AF29, by any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
Æ Follow the instructions for
submitting comments.
• Fax: 703–518–6319
Æ Include ‘‘[Your Name]—Comments
on Proposed Rule: Derivatives’’ on the
transmittal cover page.
• Mail: Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks,
Secretary of the Board, National Credit
Union Administration, 1775 Duke
Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314–
3428.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as
mail address.
Please send comments by one method
only.
Public Inspection: You may view all
public comments as submitted on the
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov, except those that
cannot be posted for technical reasons.
The NCUA will not edit or remove any
identifying or contact information from
submitted public comments. Due to
social distancing measures in effect, the
usual opportunity to inspect paper
copies of comments in the NCUA’s law
library is not currently available. After
social distancing measures are relaxed,
visitors may make an appointment to
review paper copies by calling 703–
518–6540 or emailing OGCMail@
ncua.gov.
Policy and Analysis: Tom Fay, Capital
Markets Manager, Office of Examination
and Insurance, 703–518–1179; Legal:
Justin Anderson, Senior Staff Attorney,
Office of General Counsel, 703–518–
6540; or by mail at National Credit
Union Administration, 1775 Duke
Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
As discussed throughout the
remainder of this document, the Board
is proposing to modernize its
Derivatives 1 rule by progressing from a
prescriptive construct to a more
expansive, principles-based approach.
The Board believes the proposed
amendments will make it easier and
more efficient for FCUs to manage IRR
with Derivatives while maintaining the
necessary safety and soundness
controls.
II. Background
In 2014, the Board finalized the
NCUA’s current Derivatives rule,2
which only applies to FCUs.3 Before
finalization of the current Derivatives
rule, FCUs could only use Derivatives to
hedge real estate loans produced for sale
on the secondary market; hedge interest
rate lock or forward sales commitments
for loans that the FCU originated; or
fund dividend payments on member
share certificates where the share
certificate rate was tied to an equity
index.
1 The term ‘‘Derivatives’’ is defined in both the
current rule and this proposed rule.
2 79 FR 5228 (Jan. 31, 2014).
3 As of this proposal, to use Derivatives, federally
insured, state-chartered credit unions must have
authority from the applicable state regulator
(explicit authority or case-by-case authority).
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Beginning in 1999, however, the
Board had approved several IRR
Derivative pilot programs. The pilot
programs, which remained active until
the 2014 rulemaking, provided
important insight into the safety and
efficacy of the use of Derivatives in
managing IRR over a significant time
horizon that included periods of both
rising and falling interest rates.
As noted above, in 2014, the Board,
based largely on its experience
observing the successful use of
Derivatives through the pilot programs,
finalized the current Derivatives rule.
As noted in the preamble in the
proposed and final versions of that rule,
the Board concluded that it was both
safe and beneficial to authorize the use
of Derivatives for managing IRR.
The scope of the 2014 final rule was
intentionally prescriptive, given most
FCUs’ lack of experience using
Derivatives for IRR management and the
NCUA’s need to increase its specialized
expertise to manage and supervise the
use of such instruments and the
accompanying application process
included in the rule. The
prescriptiveness of the final rule
enabled the Board to safely expand
Derivatives authority while also
ensuring that FCUs which engaged in
Derivatives did not pose an undue
safety and soundness risk to themselves,
the broader credit union industry, or the
National Credit Union Share Insurance
Fund (the Fund). As such, the 2014 final
rule included a number of restrictions
on Derivative authorities. These
included, but were not limited to,
discrete limits on the types of Derivative
products an FCU could purchase;
requiring FCUs to receive NCUA
preapproval before engaging in
Derivatives; and regulatory limits on the
amounts of Derivatives an FCU could
hold relative to its net worth.
Since 2014, the NCUA has received
many applications from FCUs and
notifications from federally insured,
state-charted credit unions (FISCUs) 4
planning to use Derivatives to manage
IRR. As of June 2020, approximately
30% of all FCUs with an approved
Derivatives application and FISCUs that
have notified the NCUA of their use of
Derivatives have outstanding Derivative
transactions.
4 FISCUs are required to notify the NCUA; they
are not required to receive NCUA approval.
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
68488
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Under the current rule, the Board and
staff have gained critical knowledge and
experience through oversight of credit
unions actively using Derivatives. This
experience has helped the NCUA
streamline the focus of its examinations
while also identifying areas where
additional regulatory relief could be
granted safely. Many of these relief
items were included as part of the
Board’s December 2018 Regulatory
Reform Agenda; 5 most of those items
are included in this proposed rule. The
Board notes that comments from the
Regulatory Reform Agenda were
generally supportive of a principlesbased approach for permissible
Derivative products for FCUs managing
IRR.
Given the observable safe and
effective management of Derivatives by
credit unions since the 2014 final rule,
the Board believes it is appropriate to
modernize the Derivatives rule to
expand the Derivatives authority for
FCUs and shift the regulation toward a
more principles-based approach. In
developing this proposed rule, the
Board carefully considered the risks
Derivatives pose, contemporary
developments in the marketplace, and
the NCUA’s experiences with credit
unions using Derivatives. While using
Derivatives to manage IRR, the Board
reminds credit unions that Derivatives
are not a panacea for managing market
risks. Derivatives, when used
responsibly, are only a part of a credit
union’s IRR framework. Credit unions
will still require appropriate risk
management by experienced staff, as
well as suitable policies, procedures,
and management oversight. Further, the
Board reminds credit unions that
implicit in a principles-based approach
is the expectation that FCUs will
maintain strong prudential controls
around their Derivative use at all times.
The Board remains committed to the
principle that any authorized Derivative
activity should be limited to the
purpose of mitigating IRR within a
discreet hedging strategy, and may not
be used to increase risks deliberately or
conduct any otherwise speculative
transactions. This proposal continues to
authorize Derivative activity by FCUs
that demonstrate risk characteristics
highly correlated to the FCU’s assets
and liabilities, such that Derivatives
would be an efficient and effective risk
mitigation tool.
For the reasons stated above, the
Board is proposing to amend the
Derivatives rule as described in the
following sections. The Board believes
these changes will provide regulatory
5 83
FR 65926 (Dec. 21, 2018).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
relief in a safe and sound manner for
credit unions choosing to utilize
Derivatives as part of their IRR
mitigation strategy.
III. Proposed Rule
As described in more detail below,
the Board is proposing to make
numerous changes to the Derivatives
rule, both substantive and technical.
The proposed changes make the
Derivatives rule less prescriptive and
more principles based. Significant
elements of this proposal include
eliminating the preapproval process for
FCUs that are complex with a
Management CAMEL component rating
of 1or 2; eliminating the specific
product permissibility; and eliminating
the regulatory limits on the amount of
Derivatives an FCU may purchase.
The aforementioned changes, as well
as proposed changes to other sections of
the NCUA’s regulations and less
significant changes to the Derivatives
rule are described in the following
section-by-section analysis.
A. Part 701
The Board is proposing to remove
paragraph (i) from § 701.21 to
consolidate it with related provisions
without intending any substantive
change. This section currently allows
FCUs to purchase put options to manage
increased IRR for real estate loans
produced for sale on the secondary
market. A put option is a financial
options contract which entitles the
holder to sell, entirely at the holder’s
option, a specific quantity of a security
at the specified price at or before the
stated expiration date of the contract.
Using put options in the manner
permitted by § 701.21(i) is a form of loan
pipeline management. Loan pipeline
management involves transactions that
are made to protect an FCU from the
changes in the value of loans between
origination and sale.
The Board is proposing to move the
authority in § 701.21(i) to a revised
§ 703.14(k) (discussed in more detail in
subsection B of this section). The
Board’s intent in proposing to move this
paragraph is to consolidate all loan
pipeline management into one
paragraph and to use a principles-based
approach for this activity. The Board
notes that this proposed change would
not eliminate or change this authority
for FCUs.
B. Subpart A to Part 703
The Board is proposing to revise
paragraph (k) of § 703.14. This section
currently lists permissible Derivative
activities for FCUs. This section
includes a list of permissible
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Derivatives, the majority of which are
addressed in subpart B to part 703 or
elsewhere in the NCUA’s regulations.
As such, this section only grants unique
authority for interest rate lock
commitments or forward sales
commitments made in connection with
a loan originated by an FCU. The Board
is proposing to revise § 703.14(k) to only
address transactions for loan pipeline
management, which would include the
purchase of put options permissible in
the current § 701.21(i) and interest rate
lock commitments or forward sales
commitments made in connection with
a loan originated by an FCU in the
current § 703.14(k). In addition to the
current permissible transactions for loan
pipeline management, the proposed
revision to § 703.14(k) would allow
other transactions as long as they are for
managing interest rate exposure of the
FCU’s loan pipeline.
Due to the revised purpose of the
paragraph, the Board is proposing to
remove § 703.14(k)(1), which refers to
the activities in § 701.21(i), § 703.14(g),
and subpart B. As discussed previously,
the Board is proposing to move the
authority in § 701.21(i) to a revised
§ 703.14(k). Section 703.14(g) permits
FCUs to purchase European financial
option contracts to fund the payment of
dividends on member share certificates
where the dividend rate is tied to an
equity index. While the reference in
§ 703.14(k)(1) to subparagraph (g) will
be removed, the Board notes that it is
not making any changes to the
aforementioned subparagraph. Subpart
B is the Derivative authority addressed
below.
As such, the Board believes
§ 703.14(k)(1) is no longer necessary,
because the revised paragraph (k) would
only address instruments for loan
pipeline management and not a broader
Derivative authority. The Board notes
that this proposed revision is technical
in nature and does not change an FCU’s
current Derivative authority.
For similar reasons to the proposed
removal of § 703.14(k)(1), the Board is
proposing to move § 703.14(k)(2) to a
new subsection (l). This new subsection
will retain the authority for FCUs to
enter into transactions where Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles
(GAAP) do not require the embedded
options to be accounted separately from
the host contract.
Further, the Board notes that this
authority contains an implicit
prohibition on FCUs entering into
embedded options where GAAP
requires the option to be accounted for
separately from the host contract. The
Board notes that such transactions
would be considered Derivatives. As
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
discussed in more detail below, the
Board is proposing to make this
prohibition explicit in subpart B to part
703. The Board believes this change is
clarifying in nature and is not intended
to make a substantive change.
The proposed revision would
continue to allow FCUs to enter into
transactions related to the management
of their loan pipeline without limiting
the activity to specified transaction
types. The current § 703.14(k)(3)
specifies that FCUs can enter into
interest rate lock commitments or
forward sales commitments made in
connection with a loan originated by an
FCU. Consistent with proposed changes
to subpart B, the Board is making this
paragraph principles-based by not
specifying product types, which will
allow FCUs more flexibility when
managing their loan pipeline.
Examples of transactions that an FCU
might use to protect itself from IRR
between origination and sale include
forward sales commitments, selling ‘‘to
be announced’’ (TBA),6 or purchasing
put options referenced in the current
§ 701.21(i). These examples would be
permissible under the proposed
§ 703.14(k). Other transactions not
mentioned would also be permissible if
they are related to the management of
interest rate exposure of an FCU’s loan
pipeline.
The Board is aware that GAAP may
classify some transactions for loan
pipeline management as Derivatives.
Such accounting classification would
not preclude an FCU from engaging in
the activity. The Board would also like
to make it clear that a Derivatives
transaction for loan pipeline
management would not be subject to the
proposed subpart B of part 703, and the
transacting FCU will not be subject to
the requirements of the aforementioned
subpart.
The Board is soliciting comments on
whether loan pipeline management
should be limited to mortgage loans as
opposed to all loans on an FCUs balance
sheet. If so, why should loan pipeline
management be limited to mortgage
loans? If not, what types of loans other
than mortgage loans would an FCU
manage using the tools in this section?
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
C. Subpart B to Part 703
Section 703.101 Purpose and Scope
The Board is proposing to retain a
majority of the purpose and scope
section in the current Derivatives rule.
Specifically, the purpose and scope
section of this proposal would continue
to make it clear that the Derivatives rule
6 To be announced. A forward-settling agency
mortgage pass-through trade.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
only applies to FCUs, except for a
limited provision related to notifications
FISCUs provide the NCUA.7 In addition,
the proposed section continues to make
it clear that an FCU may enter
Derivatives under this rule for the
exclusive purpose of managing IRR.
While the majority of this section
would remain unchanged, the Board is
proposing to eliminate the requirement
related to mutual funds. The Board is
proposing to remove the prohibition for
mutual funds to engage in Derivatives if
an FCU purchases the mutual fund
under the general investment authority.8
The current rule states that subpart B
does not permit FCUs to ‘‘invest in
registered investment companies or
collective investment funds under
§ 703.14(c) of this part, where the
prospectus of the company or fund
permit the investment portfolio to
contain Derivatives.’’ 9 In 2014, the
Board was concerned with the risk
Derivatives could add to credit unions
and the Fund. The Board believes this
prohibition is no longer necessary. The
Board believes a mutual fund can enter
into Derivative transactions in a safe
and sound manner as long as the
transactions are limited to managing
IRR. This belief stems from the
experience the Board gained from FCUs
that have engaged in Derivative
transactions since the 2014 final rule.
By removing this prohibition, the
Board would permit FCUs to invest in
mutual funds that enter into Derivative
transactions to manage IRR. Mutual
funds that enter into derivatives to
manage IRR are able to increase or
decrease the interest rate sensitivity of
the mutual fund, thereby providing the
owners of such fund with the target
duration 10 of the investment that
accounts for volatility in interest rates.
For example, a mutual fund may have
a target duration of four years, and the
current portfolio has a duration of five
years. The mutual fund may enter into
a Derivative transaction to decrease the
mutual fund’s duration, which would be
a form of IRR management.
The Board would like to make it clear
that mutual funds permissible for FCUs
under the general investment authority
will only be permitted to engage in
Derivatives to manage IRR. A mutual
fund may not engage in Derivatives that
do not manage IRR. For example, a
mutual fund that purchases Derivatives
related to equities, credit, or
7 Section 703.108 (Notification and application
requirements) addresses FISCU notification
requirements.
8 12 CFR part 703, subpart A.
9 12 CFR 703.100(b)(2).
10 Duration is the sensitivity of the price of the
mutual fund to a change in interest rates.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
68489
commodities would not be permissible
for an FCU under the general
investment authority.
The Board is also proposing to add
two paragraphs to this section to
address FCUs that are currently
operating under an approved
application for Derivatives authority or
have submitted an application for
Derivatives authority under the current
Derivatives rule and are awaiting a
determination. As discussed in the
portion of this preamble addressing
§ 701.108 of the proposal, the Board is
proposing to eliminate the application
requirement for Derivatives authority
except for certain FCUs that do not meet
limited conditions. As such, the
proposed new paragraphs in this section
would clarify that any FCU with a
current approval would be subject only
to the terms and conditions of a final
rule based off this proposal and would
no longer be subject to the requirements
included in its approved application. In
addition, any credit union not required
to submit an application under this
proposal that has submitted an
application under the current
Derivatives rule and is awaiting a
determination would be deemed to have
such application withdrawn and would
only be subject to the terms and
conditions of a final rule based off of
this proposed rule.
If this proposal is finalized, the NCUA
would continue to process any pending
application from an FCU that would be
required to submit an application under
this proposed rule. The Board notes,
however, that the NCUA would process
such application in accordance with the
more flexible standards under this
proposal rather than the standards in
the current Derivatives rule.
Section 703.102 Definitions
The Board is proposing to revise
several definitions from the current rule;
add new definitions; remove definitions
that are no longer applicable to this
proposed rule; and retain definitions
from the current rule with no changes.
The Board is proposing to modify the
definitions of the following terms in the
current Derivatives rule:
• Counterparty;
• Interest Rate Risk;
• Margin;
• Master Service Agreement;
• Net Economic Value;
• Senior Executive Officer;
• Threshold Amount; and
• Trade Date.
The Board is proposing to revise the
definition of Counterparty to include
reference to the regulatory citations for
the terms ‘‘Swap dealer’’ and
‘‘Derivatives clearing organization.’’
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
68490
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Including these citations in the
definition will allow the Board to
remove the definitions for ‘‘Swap
dealer’’ and ‘‘Derivatives clearing
organization’’ in this proposal and the
corresponding cross-references. This
change would make the Derivatives rule
more user-friendly and aid in
readability.
The Board is proposing to revise the
definition of Interest Rate Risk to make
it consistent with the definition used in
the Interest Rate Risk chapter of the
NCUA’s Examiner’s Guide.11 The
proposed revision changes
‘‘vulnerability’’ to ‘‘current and
prospective risk’’ and changes ‘‘earnings
or economic value’’ to ‘‘capital and
earnings.’’ The Board believes these
proposed revisions help better articulate
what IRR is, from the NCUA’s
perspective. The proposed revised
definition of IRR also removes
‘‘Federal’’ when referring to a credit
union and removes ‘‘market’’ when
referring to interest rates. The Board
views the qualifiers of ‘‘Federal’’ and
‘‘market’’ as unnecessary, and views
these changes as technical.
The Board is proposing to revise the
definition of Margin to add clarity. The
proposed revision to Margin changes
‘‘funds’’ to ‘‘eligible collateral, as
defined by § 703.104(c)’’ to make the
definition more user-friendly to the
reader. The Board believes readers can
more easily reference eligible collateral
with this change through directing the
reader to the section where eligible
collateral is defined. The Board is also
proposing to change ‘‘as detailed in a
Master Services Agreement’’ to ‘‘as
detailed in a credit support annex or
clearing arrangement.’’ The Board is
proposing this change to reflect the
location of contractual requirements for
eligible collateral, which is contained in
the credit support annex for non-cleared
Derivative transactions. The Board
considers these changes clarifications
and technical.
The Board is proposing to change the
definition of Master Service Agreement.
The proposed revised definition
removes the language regarding the
application of the Master Service
Agreement to future transactions with
the same counterparty. The Board
believes the reference to future
transactions is unnecessary since the
Master Service Agreement, not the
NCUA definition, will define the terms
of the agreement.
The Board is proposing to revise the
definition of Net Economic Value. The
proposed revision changes ‘‘economic
11 https://www.ncua.gov/regulation-supervision/
manuals-guides/examiners-guide.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
value of assets minus the economic
value of liabilities’’ to ‘‘measurement of
changes in the economic value of net
worth caused by changes in interest
rates.’’ As with the change in the
definition of Interest Rate Risk, the
proposed Net Economic Value
definition would be consistent with the
definition used in the NCUA’s IRR
examiner guidance. The Board believes
this will add clarity by providing
readers with a consistent definition
across the NCUA’s regulatory and
supervisory framework.
The Board is proposing to revise the
definition of Senior Executive Officer by
removing ‘‘as identified in a Federal
credit union’s process and
responsibility framework, as discussed
in § 703.106(b)(1) of this subpart.’’ The
Board is proposing this change, as this
proposal removes the process and
responsibility framework referenced in
the definition. The proposed definition
for Senior Executive Officer will still
have the meaning as specified in
§ 701.14 and include any other similar
employee that is directly within the
chain of command for oversight of an
FCU’s Derivative program. Senior
Executive Officers will continue to have
reporting requirements as specified in
§ 703.105 and be responsible for the
operational support requirements in
§ 703.106.
The Board is proposing to revise the
definition of Threshold Amount to add
clarity to the permissible collateral. The
proposed revision changes ‘‘collateral’’
to ‘‘eligible collateral.’’ Furthermore, the
proposed revised definition adds a
clarifier that eligible collateral is ‘‘as
defined in § 703.104(c).’’ The Board
believes these changes will provide
clarity to the reader on where to find
eligible collateral type within the
proposed rule, and does not believe
such change is material.
Finally, the Board is proposing to
revise the definition of Trade Date to
replace the reference to ‘‘in the market’’
with ‘‘with the counterparty.’’ The
Board believes this change provides
specificity to the definition, because a
trade is executed with a counterparty
and not a market.
The Board is proposing to add the
following definitions:
• Domestic Counterparty;
• Domestic Interest Rates;
• Earnings at Risk; and
• Written Options.
The Board is proposing to add a
definition for Domestic Counterparty.
This proposal would define a Domestic
Counterparty as a counterparty
domiciled in the United States. This
definition is necessary because the
Board is proposing that FCUs can only
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
enter into Derivatives transactions with
Domestic Counterparties.
The Board is proposing to add a
definition of Domestic Interest Rates.
This proposal would define Domestic
Interest Rates as interest rates derived in
the United States and are U.S. dollar
denominated. The Board is including
this definition to ensure there is no
ambiguity in the term Domestic Interest
Rates.
The Board is proposing to add a
definition for Earnings at Risk. This
proposal would define Earnings at Risk
as the changes to earnings, typically in
the short term, caused by changes in
interest rates. This is consistent with the
definition in the NCUA’s IRR examiner
guidance. This definition is necessary
because this is a type of modeling
would be required for an FCU’s asset/
liability risk management under this
proposed rule.
Finally, the Board is proposing to add
a definition for Written Options. The
Board is defining Written Options as
options where compensation has been
received and the purchaser has the
right, not obligation, to exercise the
option on a future date. This definition
is necessary because the Board is
proposing to prohibit Written Options
in this proposed rule.
The Board is proposing to eliminate
the following definitions that appear in
the current rule:
• Amortizing Notional Amount;
• Basis Swap;
• Cleared Swap;
• Credit Support Annex;
• Derivative Clearing Organization;
• Exchange;
• Fair Value;
• Forward Start Date;
• Futures;
• Futures Commission Merchant
(FCM);
• Hedge;
• Interest Rate Swap;
• Introducing Broker;
• ISDA Protocol;
• Leveraged Derivative;
• Minimum Transfer Amount;
• Non-cleared;
• Notional Amount;
• Reporting Date;
• Swap Dealer;
• Swap Execution Facility; and
• Unamortized Premium.
The Board is proposing to remove the
above mentioned definitions as they are
no longer relevant in this proposal. Most
definitions lose their relevancy due to
the proposal’s shift to a principles-based
approach from the more prescriptive
approach in the current rule. The Board
is proposing to move the regulatory
citations for Derivative Clearing
Organization and Swap Dealer into the
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
definition of Counterparty, making these
definitions no longer necessary.
The Board is proposing to retain the
following definitions from the current
rule without amendment:
• Derivative;
• Economic Effectiveness;
• External Service Provider;
• Field Director; 12
• Interest Rate Cap;
• Interest Rate Floor;
• Net Worth;
• Novation;
• Reference Interest Rate; and
• Structured Liability Offering.
The Board is proposing to retain the
above mentioned definitions from the
current rule because they are still
relevant and necessary for this proposed
rule.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Section 703.103 Requirements Related
to the Characteristics of Permissible
Interest Rate Derivatives
The Board is proposing to replace the
‘‘Permissible Derivatives’’ section of the
current rule with the new proposed
§ 703.103 titled ‘‘Requirements related
to the characteristics of permissible
interest rate Derivatives.’’ The proposed
title change will better reflect the intent
of the section.
As established in the background
section of this document, the Board is
proposing to use a principles-based
approach with Derivatives to manage
IRR. This approach will replace the
prescriptive list of products permitted
and some of the required characteristics
in the current rule.
The Board is proposing that FCUs
may use Derivatives to manage IRR,
provided such Derivatives have all of
the following characteristics:
• Denominated in U.S. dollars;
• Based off Domestic Interest Rates or
dollar-denominated London Interbank
Offered Rate (LIBOR); The Board notes
that The United Kingdom Kingdom’s
Financial Conduct Authority has
announced that it will not guarantee
LIBOR’s availability beyond the end of
2021, and risks associated with LIBOR
discontinuation could occur prior to the
end of 2021. On July 1, 2020 the FFIEC
released a Joint Statement on Managing
the LIBOR Transition, that among other
things, highlights LIBOR transition risks
and encourages supervised institutions
to continue their efforts to prepare for
and manage associated risks.13 As such,
the Board will monitor the LIBOR
12 The Board is proposing to change ‘‘Field’’ to
‘‘Regional’’ to better align with the NCUA’s other
regulations. Such change will not, however, amend
the definition of this term.
13 https://www.ffiec.gov/press/pr070120.htm.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
transition and will make any necessary
changes to a final Derivatives rule.
• A contract maturity equal to or less
than 15 years, as of the Trade Date; and
• Not used to create Structured
Liability Offerings for members of
nonmembers.
All of the characteristics above are in
the current Derivatives rule. Consistent
with the current Derivative rule and the
limitations for variable rate investments
set in § 703.14(a),14 the Board is
proposing to continue to limit
permissible indices for Derivatives to
Domestic Interest Rates. In addition, any
Derivatives transaction must be
denominated in U.S. dollars. These
restrictions are consistent with the use
of Derivatives to manage IRR, as an
FCU’s IRR is correlated to changes in
domestic interest rates. Further, an
FCUs Derivatives program will be
hedging against transactions that are
also denominated in U.S. Dollars.
Consistent with the current Derivative
rule, the Board is proposing to keep the
current contract maturity limit (15
years, as of the Trade Date). As with the
current rule, the Board believes this will
continue to allow FCUs to effectively
hedge various points of the yield curve
for longer-term assets like mortgages,
while preventing an excessive exposure
to very long Derivative maturities.
Lastly, the Board is proposing to
continue to prohibit Derivatives to
create Structured Liability Offerings for
members or nonmembers.15 The Board
continues to believe this activity is
inconsistent with FCUs managing IRR.
The Board believes the abovementioned characteristics are consistent
with a principles-based approach while
maintaining guardrails for safety and
soundness and consistency with
requirement for Derivatives to be used
for managing IRR.
As mentioned in the background
section of this document, the Board is
proposing to remove reference to
specific product types. The current
Derivative rule allows credit unions to
enter into interest rate swaps, basis
swaps, purchased interest rate caps,
purchased interest rate floors, and U.S.
Treasury note futures, with some
conditions applied. The proposed rule
will allow for all of the specific product
types identified in the current rule, as
well as additional product types that
meet the above characteristics.
The Board has found that Derivatives
not included in the current rule would
allow FCUs to manage IRR without
adding an incremental risk versus the
14 12
CFR 703.14(a).
financial put options are permissible
per 12 CFR 703.14(g).
15 European
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
68491
current rule. For example, an FCU could
decide to manage short-term IRR with
Eurodollar futures. This transaction
could be done in a safe and sound
manner without adding incremental risk
versus a Derivative that is currently
permissible for FCUs.
In addition, the Board is proposing to
remove the following requirements for
the characteristics of Derivatives
authorized for FCU use that appear in
the current rule:
• Forward start date limitations;
• Fluctuating notional amount
limitations;
• Restriction on leveraged
Derivatives; and
• Meet the definition of Derivative
under GAAP.
The Board is removing forward start
date limitations in the proposal because
it no longer believes a forward start date
beyond 90 days poses an undue risk to
an FCU. When making this
determination, the Board considered
two potential scenarios, one in which an
FCU enters into a ten-year swap which
settles in three days, and one in which
an FCU enters into a ten-year swap
which settles in one year. The FCU
would record both swaps on the FCU’s
financial statements as of trade date and
both will have a contract maturity of 10
years. The major difference between the
two is that cash-flows (excluding
Margin requirements) will not be
exchanged in the first year for the swap
that has a longer settlement. The Board
no longer believes this extended
settlement would create an undue risk
for an FCU, at least no more than the
conventional settlement of an interest
rate swap since the price volatility and
modeling for both swaps are similar.
The Board is also proposing to remove
the fluctuating notional amounts limits
in the current rule. The Board believes
keeping this limitation would be
inconsistent with the new principlesbased approach and would not add any
additional safety and soundness
protections.
The Board is proposing to remove the
restriction on leveraged Derivatives
from the current rule. As discussed in
the section below, the Board is
proposing to remove limits on the
amount of Derivatives an FCU can have
exposure to. The current restriction on
leveraged Derivatives was included due
to the notional limits in the current rule.
Therefore, there is no need for a
leveraged Derivative prohibition if there
are no notional limits on Derivatives in
this proposal.
The Board is also proposing to remove
the requirement that a Derivative
‘‘(m)eet the definition of Derivative
under GAAP.’’ The Board believes this
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
68492
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
requirement is moot, because all the
Derivatives in the proposed rule would
meet the definition of a Derivative
under GAAP.
In the process of broadening the
Derivative products and characteristics
in this proposal versus the current rule,
the Board did retain one prohibition.
The Board is proposing to prohibit an
FCU from engaging in Written Options.
This activity is impermissible under the
current Derivative rule. A Written
Option would obligate a credit union to
pay the purchaser if the option is in the
money 16 at maturity. If an FCU were to
engage in Written Options, it would
receive a payment from the purchaser.
The payment would be the maximum
profit the FCU could realize if the
option were to expire with no value.
However, the Written Option could
produce losses in excess of the
maximum profit an FCU could realize.
The gain/loss profile of an option limits
the gain to the premium the option
writer receives at inception of the
option. The loss profile of the option,
however, can be multiples of the
premium received from the purchaser.
The Board believes this asymmetric
return profile could potentially cause a
safety and soundness issue for an FCU
engaging in Written Options.
The Board is specifically seeking
comment on whether the NCUA should
allow FCUs to engage in Written
Options for managing IRR, and specific
scenarios where a Written Option could
be used to manage IRR.
The Board is proposing to retain and
clarify the current prohibition on FCUs
engaging in embedded options required
under GAAP to be accounted for
separately from the host contract. This
prohibition is implicit in the current
§ 703.14(k)(2). The Board notes that
currently § 703.14(k)(2) permits FCUs to
enter into embedded options where the
option is not, under GAAP, required to
be accounted for separately from the
host contract. While not explicit the
Board has historically interpreted this
provision as also prohibiting FCUs from
engaging in embedded options that are
required, under GAAP, to be accounted
for separately from the host contract.
For clarity purposes the Board is making
this prohibition explictit rather than
implicit and moving it to this section of
the proprosed rule. The Board believes
retaining this prohition is necessary, as
these types of derivatives are overly
complex compared to the limited
derivatives that are permissible under
the current rule and this proposal.
16 Option expires with a positive value at
maturity.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
Finally, the Board is proposing to
remove all limitations that appear in
§ 703.103 in the current rule. The Board
believes Derivative limits are
inconsistent with a principles-based
approach, especially when the activity
is to manage IRR. The current rule has
limits on the weighted average
remaining maturity notional and fair
value loss limits, both of which would
be removed by the current proposal.
In the current rule, FCUs are subject
to two types of limits: A fair value loss
limit and a weighted average remaining
maturity notional (WARMN) limit. The
fair value loss limit put a cap on the
unrealized losses an FCU could have
associated with its Derivative holdings.
The WARMN limit is based on the
notional amounts of Derivatives held by
an FCU adjusted for the maturity of the
transactions. Using notional with
maturity captures price risk better
compared to only using notional.
These limits were designed to limit an
FCU’s Derivative unrealized losses and
the price risk of an FCU’s Derivative
positions. The limits were either entry
limits or standard limits. The entry limit
was the lower of the two limits and was
for an FCU that had been engaging in
Derivative transactions for less than a
year. The entry limit in the current rule
caps the fair value loss at 15 percent of
Net Worth and caps the WARMN at 65
percent of Net Worth. The intent of this
limit was to ensure an FCU did not take
a large amount of Derivative exposure
without offering the NCUA an
opportunity to examine the activity.
The standard limit is higher than the
entry limit, and allowed FCUs to take
more Derivative exposure after a year’s
worth of Derivative activity. The
standard limit in the current rule caps
the fair value loss at 25 percent of Net
Worth and caps the WARMN at 100
percent of Net Worth.
Based on the supervisory experience
from the past six years, the Board has
determined that the limits from the
current Derivative rule do not offer the
safety and soundness protections they
were intended to provide. First, the
Board has found that FCUs do not
generally approach the limits in the
current Derivative rule. Moreover, in
cases where an FCU did approach the
limit, the Board found that additional
Derivative exposure would not have
created a safety and soundness concern
for the NCUA. The Board also believes
removing the burden of measuring and
reporting the limits in the current rule
outweighs the potential benefit of
having limits. The Board would like to
note that the NCUA will still review
Derivative exposure when examining an
FCU’s Derivative program and may
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
determine that excessive exposures may
be a safety and soundness finding,
subject to the various administrative
remedies permissible under the Federal
Credit Union Act.
Section 703.104 Requirements for
Counterparty Agreements, Collateral
and Margining
The Board is proposing to revise the
requirements for counterparty
agreements, collateral and margining.
The Board is proposing to require FCUs
to:
• Have an executed Master Services
Agreement with a Domestic
Counterparty that must be reviewed by
counsel with expertise in similar types
of transactions to ensure it reasonably
protects the FCU’s interests;
• Use contracted Margin
requirements with a maximum Margin
threshold amount of $250,000; and
• Accept as collateral, for Margin
requirements, only the following:
Æ Cash (U.S. dollars);
Æ U.S. Treasuries;
Æ Government-sponsored enterprise
debt;
Æ U.S. government agency debt;
Æ Government-sponsored enterprise
residential mortgage-backed security
pass-through securities; and
Æ U.S. government agency residential
mortgage-backed security pass-through
securities.
These requirements are generally
consistent with the requirements in
§ 703.104(a) in the current rule,17 with
a few exceptions. The current rule
breaks down permissible counterparties
and requirements for exchange-traded
and cleared Derivative transactions and
for non-cleared Derivative transactions.
In exchange-traded and cleared
Derivative transactions there is a
clearinghouse between the two
counterparties. The Dodd-Frank Act
requires a clearinghouse for these types
of Derivative transactions.18 Non-cleared
Derivative transactions are those that
take place between two parties without
involving a clearinghouse. Federal
credit unions are exempt from
mandatory use of a clearinghouse due to
the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (CFTC) exemption for
cooperatives.19
For simplification, the Board is
proposing to create one standard for
both exchange-traded and cleared
Derivative transactions, and for noncleared Derivative transactions. In the
17 12
CFR 703.104(a).
Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act, Public Law 111–203, 723, 124 Stat.,
July 21, 2010.
19 17 CFR 50.51.
18 Dodd-Frank
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
proposed standard, the Board requires
an FCU to enter a Master Services
Agreement with a Domestic
Counterparty before engaging in
Derivative transactions under this
proposal. A Master Service Agreement
is the contract that dictates the terms of
the Derivative contract.
The current rule does not dictate that
exchange-traded and cleared Derivative
transactions are required to have a
Master Service Agreement, but the
Board believes it is standard practice for
exchange-traded and cleared Derivative
transactions to document standard
terms that apply to all transactions
entered into between two parties. The
Board believes the proposed Domestic
Counterparty requirement is consistent
with the current rule that requires CFTC
registrants for exchange-traded
Derivatives and registered swap dealers
for non-cleared Derivatives. The Board
also believes the requirement of having
a Master Services Agreement is
consistent with the current rule and
reflects standard industry practice.
The Board is also proposing to require
that the Master Services Agreement be
reviewed by counsel that has expertise
with similar types of transactions to
ensure the agreement reasonably
protects an FCU’s interests. This is a
clarifying change compared to the
current rule, but is not a new
requirement. The current rule requires
the legal review be performed by
counsel that has legal expertise with
Derivative contracts and related matters.
The proposal will only require the
Master Services Agreement be reviewed
by counsel that has expertise with
similar types of transactions to ensure
the agreement reasonably protects an
FCU’s interest. The Board believes that
complex loan or securities documents
meet the standard for similar types of
transactions.
The Board is proposing a contracted
Margin requirement with a maximum
Margin threshold amount of $250,000
for both exchange-traded and cleared,
and non-cleared Derivative transactions.
Margin helps protect counterparties
from the credit risk of a counterparty by
requiring the counterparty to post
collateral if they are in a net loss
position. The permissible type of
collateral for FCUs is discussed later in
this document. The maximum Margin
threshold is the maximum amount a
party in the Derivative transaction can
be undercollaterized.
The Board did not specify a maximum
Margin threshold for exchange-traded
and cleared Derivatives in the current
rule, but did specify the same threshold
for non-cleared Derivatives, which is the
same as in this proposed rule. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
Board believes the maximum Margin
threshold in the proposal for exchangetraded and cleared Derivatives is
consistent with clearing houses for
exchange-traded and cleared
Derivatives.
The Board is proposing to revise the
existing eligible collateral requirements
in two ways.20 First, the Board is
proposing to add a requirement that
exchange-traded and cleared Derivatives
be subject to the collateral requirements.
The current rule does not specify
collateral types for exchange-traded and
cleared Derivatives. The Board believes
the eligible collateral requirements are
generally consistent with the collateral
requirement for the clearing houses for
exchange-traded Derivatives. The Board
is seeking specific comment on whether
specifying acceptable collateral for
exchange-traded and cleared Derivatives
may create unintended consequences
for FCUs. If so, the Board is seeking
comment on what the unintended
consequences may be, and how the
NCUA should modify the proposal. For
example, should the NCUA revert to not
having collateral standards for
exchange-traded and cleared Derivatives
as in the current rule?
The second change from the current
rule is that the Board is proposing to
add U.S. government agency residential
mortgage backed pass-through securities
(for example, Government National
Mortgage Association (GNMA) passthrough securities) as an acceptable
collateral type. GNMA pass-through
securities are guaranteed by the U.S.
government and are highly liquid. Not
including this collateral type was an
oversight from the current rule, which
the Board is proposing to remedy with
this amendment. The proposal
continues to restrict the forms of
collateral to the most liquid and easily
valued instruments so they can be easily
negotiated even in times of market
illiquidity.
Section 703.105 Reporting
Requirements
The Board is proposing to retain
certain parts of the reporting
requirements in the current Derivatives
rule. The current rule requires that
FCUs provide their board of directors,
senior executive officers, and, if
applicable, asset liability committee a
comprehensive Derivatives report.
Specifically, the Board is retaining the
required frequency of reporting (at least
quarterly to the FCU’s board of
directors, and at least monthly to the
FCU’s senior executive officer and
20 Eligible collateral is used to satisfy the Margin
requirements for FCUs.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
68493
applicable asset liability committee).
The Board is also retaining the
requirements outlining what must be
included in these reports. This includes
identification of any areas of
noncompliance with any provision of
this rule or the FCU’s policies; an
itemization of the FCU’s individual
transactions subject to the rule; the
current values of such transactions; each
individual transaction’s intended use
for IRR mitigation; and a comprehensive
view of the FCU’s risk reports,
including, but not limited to, IRR
calculations with details of the
transactions subject to the rule.
The Board has also consolidated and
streamlined the current rule’s reporting
requirements in this proposal in
§ 703.105(c)(3) to include the relative
risk reports and intended use of
Derivatives for IRR management. The
Board is also proposing to eliminate the
reporting of compliance with regulatory
limits, which aligns with this proposal’s
elimination of the regulatory limits
The Board believes that retaining
these reporting requirements is essential
to FCUs maintaining strong internal
controls related to Derivative
transactions, given the principles-based
approach of this proposed rule. The
Board also believes that the proposed
reporting requirements are less
burdensome to FCUs, while ensuring
the proper credit union officials receive
reports that are necessary to oversee a
credit union’s Derivatives program.
In conjunction with the regulatory
violation requirements of proposed
§ 703.109, discussed later in this
document, the Board is proposing to
require that an FCU submit the
Derivatives management report to the
applicable Regional Director 21 when
there has been a regulatory violation or
violation of the FCU’s policies. This is
not a new reporting requirement; the
current rule requires an FCU to submit
a description of the violation and the
corrective action within three business
days of a violation.22 The Board is
proposing to allow an FCU to submit the
Derivatives management report to its
board of directors before submitting
such report to the applicable Regional
Director. The Board notes that an FCU
is required to submit the Derivatives
management report to the applicable
Regional Director when there has been
a violation of the regulation or the
FCU’s policies. The Board has also
added a requirement that the
21 Regional Director is a defined term in the
Derivatives rule, which means the applicable NCUA
Regional Director or the Director of the Office of
National Examinations and Supervision.
22 12 CFR 703.114(a)(2).
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
68494
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Derivatives report be made available to
NCUA examiners upon request. The
Board notes that this is not a new
burden, but merely a transparent
codification of exisiting authority,
which will provide NCUA examiners
the documents to support the
compliance with the requirements of
this subpart.
The Board is proposing to add the
requirement that FCUs retain reports to
the Board and Senior Executive Officers
in accordance with the Record
Retention Guidelines set forth in
Appendix A to part 749.23
Section 703.106(a) Operational
Support Requirements; Required
Experience and Competencies
The Board believes that a credit
union’s board of directors and senior
executive officers need sufficient
experience and knowledge to effectively
oversee a Derivatives program.
Therefore, the Board is proposing to
retain many of the experience and
competency requirements from the
current rule 24 in this proposal. First, the
Board is proposing to retain the
requirement that an FCU’s board of
directors receive training before an FCU
engages in its first Derivative
transaction. Any new board of director
subsequent to the initial training of the
board of directors must receive
Derivatives training. Such training must
provide board members a general
understanding of Derivative transactions
and the knowledge required to provide
strategic oversight of the FCU’s
Derivatives program. The Board,
however, is proposing to remove the
requirement, in the current Derivatives
rule, that an FCU’s board members
receive annual Dervivatives training. As
discussed further in the next paragraph,
the Board is substituting the required
annual training with an annual briefing
from the FCU’s Senior Executive
Officers.
The Board considers the transparency
of the Derivatives program with the
board of directors to be a critical part of
the FCU’s internal controls and
communication. As such the Board is
replacing the requirement in the current
rule that requires annual training after
the initial training with a requirement
that the board be briefed, at least
annually, on the Derivatives program
using the required reporting to the board
as prescribed in § 703.105(a) of this
subpart.
In addition to the annual training, the
Board believes that the required
reporting requirements to the board of
23 Id.
24 Id.
at Appendix A to part 749.
at § 703.106.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
directors (proposed § 703.105 of this
subpart) will provide the necessary
transparency and disclosure of such
activities on an ongoing basis. .
The Board is proposing to retain the
requirement that an FCU’s senior
executive officers must be able to
understand, approve, and provide
oversight for a Derivatives program.
Senior executive officers must have a
comprehensive understanding of how
Derivatives fit into the credit union’s
risk management process.
The Board believes that an FCU must
have qualified personnel to manage the
asset/liability risk management
functions when a Derivatives program is
in place. Personnel must have enhanced
capabilities to estimate the credit
union’s Earnings at Risk and Net
Economic Value based on the market’s
expectation of future interest rates and
any potential changes from those
expectations. The Board is retaining the
staff qualifications from the current rule
to support the complexity of Derivatives
for trade execution, financial reporting,
accounting, and the operational
processes related to Margin
requirements.
Section 703.106(b) Operational
Support Requirements; Required
Review and Internal Controls Structure
The Board is proposing to retain the
current requirements for transaction
review and internal controls.25 For
transaction reviews, the Board is
retaining the requirement that an FCU
identify and document the
circumstances that lead to the decision
to execute a transaction, specify the
strategy the credit union will employ,
and demonstrate the economic
effectiveness of the transaction. The
Board is retaining the requirement for
transaction reviews because such
reviews are critical to an FCU and the
NCUA understanding how Derivatives
are being used to manage IRR.
For internal controls reviews, the
Board is proposing to reduce the
number of required internal controls
reviews an FCU must conduct. The
current rule requires internal controls
reviews for the first two years from
when an FCU commenced its
Derivatives program.26 The Board is
proposing to reduce this to only the first
year after an FCU engages in its first
Derivative transaction. The Board
believes that retaining at least one
internal controls review, along with the
required reporting and operational
provisions in this proposal, is prudent
in supporting a safe and sound
25 Id.
at 703.106(b).
26 Id.
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Derivatives program. However, credit
unions should continue to review and
strengthen controls accordingly.
The Board believes the internal
controls review should be a
comprehensive review of all aspects of
an FCU’s Derivatives functions, with
timely identification and resolution of
all findings. The Board is retaining the
other provisions of the current rule
associated with internal controls
reviews including that an internal
controls reviews must be conducted by
an independent external unit or, if
applicable, the FCU’s internal auditor.
The Board believes that an independent
unit would be objective to the business
processes in supporting Derivatives.
The Board is retaining the current
rule’s requirement that any FCU
engaging in Derivatives transactions
pursuant to this subpart must obtain an
annual financial statement audit, as
defined in § 715.2(d), in supporting that
all transactions are accurately accounted
for in accordance with GAAP.
The Board is also proposing to remove
the specific provision from the current
rule (§ 703.106(b)(4)) for the process and
responsibility framework as credit
unions have generally included these
items as part of their policies and
procedures. The Board believes that,
irrespective of a specific requirement,
FCUs entering into Derivatives would
continue to include the necessary
information in their policies and
procedures.
The Board is proposing to retain the
requirement for separation of duties in
the current rule to further support the
prudent risk management and internal
controls in supporting a Derivatives
program. The Board believes adequate
separation of duties is nessecary to
effectuate a Derivatives program in a
safe and sound manner by eliminating
the propensity for insider fraud and
abuse.
The Board is proposing to add a
requirement for a liquidity review as
part of the operational support
requirements, given the importance of
asset/liability management and the
potential liquidity pressures associated
with Margin requirements with a
Derivative counterparty and having the
eligible collateral as a potential use for
Margin requirements. In addition, the
liquidity review must also address how
an FCU is planning on responding to
potential changes in interest rates,
which may require significant and
unpredictable Margin requirements
from the Derivative counterparty that
must be settled on a daily basis over and
above the Margin threshold.
The Board is retaining the
requirements of policies and procedures
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
in that the policies must address the
requirements of this subpart and any
additional limitations imposed by the
FCU’s board of directors. The Board is
retaining the requirement that a review
of the policies and procedures must be
completed annually by the board of
directors. The Board believes that
effective policies and procedures which
are reviewed annually are critical to
maintaining and supporting a
Derivatives program.
Section 703.107 External Service
Providers
The Board is proposing some changes
to FCU’s use of External Service
Providers (ESPs) from the current rule.
The general requirements in this
proposal address restrictions on ESPs,
an FCU’s ability to oversee and manage
ESPs, and an FCU’s documentation of
the specific uses of ESPs.
As with the current Derivative rule,
the Board is proposing to allow ESPs,
provided the ESP (including its
affiliates) does not:
• Act as a counterparty to any
Derivatives transactions that involve the
FCU;
• Act as a principal or agent in any
Derivatives transactions that involve the
FCU; or
• Have discretionary authority to
execute any of the FCU’s Derivatives
transactions.
The above prohibitions on ESPs are
identical to the prohibitions in the
current rule. The Board continues to
believe there would be an inherent
conflict of interest if an ESP (including
its affiliates) acted as a counterparty or
principle/agent for a Derivative
transaction. Therefore, the Board is
proposing to retain this prohibition.
The Board is also proposing to retain
the prohibition of an ESP having
discretionary authority to execute any of
an FCU’s Derivative transactions.
Allowing discretionary authority for an
ESP would remove a level of control
from an FCU, which is inconsistent with
an FCU’s operational support
requirements.
The Board also is proposing to retain
the current requirements in the
Derivatives rule that an FCU must have
the internal capacity, experience, and
skills to oversee and manage any ESP it
uses. This requirement is consistent
with an FCU’s duties required in the
operational support requirements and
safety and soundness.
The Board is proposing a slight
modification in how FCUs will be
required to document specific uses of
ESPs. The Board is proposing to remove
the reference to its ‘‘process and
responsibilities framework’’ from the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
current rule, because the Board is
proposing to no longer require the
framework in this proposal.
The Board is proposing to replace the
process and responsibilities framework
requirement with the documentation
being required in its policies and
procedures. The Board believes this
proposed change offers FCUs a clearer
understanding of the NCUA’s
requirements, because FCUs are more
familiar with policies and procedures
than process and responsibilities
frameworks, which may be considered
nebulous. The process and
responsibilities framework is unique to
the current Derivative rule; policies and
procedures are either required or
expected for many FCU activities
outside of Derivatives.
The Board is also proposing to clarify
that an FCU’s use of ESPs does not
alleviate the credit union of its
responsibility to employ qualified
personnel in accordance with the
operational support requirements of the
proposed rule. The Board believes this
requirement is consistent with the
current rule and the proposed operation
support requirements in § 703.106, and
also believes such clarification is
necessary due to the proposed removal
of an application process in the
proposed § 703.108 for some FCUs.
Lastly, the Board is proposing to
remove the support functions paragraph
in the current rule. The support
functions paragraph in the current rule
requires an FCU to perform asset/
liability management and liquidity risk
management internally and
independently. The Board believes this
paragraph is not necessary for two
reasons. First, the proposed operational
support requirements section in the
proposed § 703.106 already contains an
FCU’s requirements for asset/liability
management and liquidity risk
management. Second, the Board
believes the current requirement created
confusion in cases where an FCU had
oversight and control of both functions
and was using models housed at the
ESP to perform these functions.
The Board believes removing this
requirement will make it clear that an
FCU may house asset/liability
management and liquidity risk
management at an ESP if the credit
union has oversight and control of both
functions. The Board believes the
proposed changes remain consistent
with the intent of the current rule, albeit
less prescriptive.
Section 703.108 Notification and
Application Requirements
The Board is proposing to eliminate
the application process for FCUs with at
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
68495
least $500 million in assets and that
have a CAMEL Management component
rating of 1 or 2. However, the Board is
proposing that an FCU provide the
applicable Regional Director a written
notification within five business days
after entering into its first Derivative
transaction.
In determining the proposed dollar
threshold of $500 million, the Board
takes the position that FCUs that will be
subject to the NCUA’s risk-based capital
(RBC) requirements and will be deemed
‘‘complex’’ generally have the required
infrastructure to enter into Derivative
transactions without preapproval. The
Board also contemplated thresholds
higher and lower than $500 million, but
believes the threshold of $500 million is
appropriate due to FCU’s this size
generally having the required
infrastructure to enter into Derivative
transactions. The Board is specifically
requesting comment on whether the
dollar threshold for the new notification
provision in the proposal should be
increased or decreased, and why such
increase or decrease is warranted. For
example, should the Board change the
dollar threshold to $250 million or $1
billion? Furthermore, as an added
safeguard beyond the ‘‘at least $500
million in assets’’ criteria, the Board is
proposing to only allow FCUs that have
a CAMEL Management component
rating of 1or 2 to be exempt from the
application process.
The Board believes a CAMEL
Management component rating of 1 or 2
demonstrates FCUs with at least $500
million in assets have at least
satisfactory management and board
practices relative to the FCU’s size and,
in general, have effectively identified,
measured, monitored, and controlled
risks at the FCU. However, the Board is
proposing to require FCUs with more
than $500 million in assets and a
CAMEL Management component rating
of 1 or 2 to provide written notification
to the appropriate Regional Director
within five business days after entering
into their first Derivative transaction to
ensure the NCUA is aware of their
activity. This will provide the NCUA
the opportunity to schedule a
supervision contact or an examination if
it is deemed necessary.
The Board is proposing that an FCU
that does not meet the notification
criteria (those with less than $500
million in assets and/or a CAMEL
Management component rating of 3, 4,
or 5) submit an application to the
applicable Regional Director for
Derivatives authority that contains
content generally consistent with the
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
68496
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
current rule.27 Requiring such content
will ensure that such an FCU can
demonstrate the requisite systems and
expertise to support Derivatives.
The Board is proposing three nontechnical changes to the application
content in the current rule. First, instead
of requiring an FCU to provide a list of
Derivatives products and product
characteristics it is applying for
authority to use, the Board is proposing
requiring the FCU to provide a list of
products and characteristics it intends
to use. This change is necessitated by
the Board moving towards a principlesbased approach on products and
characteristics.
Second, the Board is proposing to
remove the requirement for an FCU to
provide ‘‘a description of how it intends
to use the products and characteristics
listed, an analysis of how the products
and characteristics fit within its interest
rate risk mitigation plan, and a
justification for each product and
characteristic listed.’’ 28 The Board
believes this requirement is too
prescriptive and creates an unnecessary
burden on FCUs.
Finally, the Board is proposing the
addition of a provision that the Regional
Director may request additional
information as part of an FCU’s
application for Derivatives authority.
The Board believes the Regional
Director has always had this authority,
but believes adding it to the rule
provides clarity.
The NCUA plans to modify its current
application guidance to be consistent
with any new final Derivative rule. The
Board would like to note that the
proposed rule no longer has a provision
to apply for interim approval. The Board
believes the interim approval provision
in the current rule provided no benefits
for FCUs and, conversely, increased
burden on both FCUs and the NCUA.
In this proposal, the Board included
an application review paragraph for
FCUs subject to application
requirements. The application review
paragraph is consistent with the current
rule’s approval section, but does not
address interim approval. The Board is
proposing to only allow final approvals
for Derivative applications. The Board
has retained the right for an FCU to
appeal the denial of a Derivative
application, consistent with the current
rule.
The Board also is proposing a change
in the condition paragraph that requires
FCUs to immediately cease entering into
any new Derivatives and contact the
applicable Regional Director if the FCU
27 12
28 Id.
CFR 703.110.
at § 703.110(b).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
experiences a change in condition such
that it no longer meets the requirements
for a notification FCU or if an FCU’s
application becomes materially
inaccurate.
For example, an FCU that engaged in
Derivatives after notifying its applicable
Regional Director (required after
entering into the first Derivative
transaction) and is subsequently
downgraded to a CAMEL Management
component rating of 3 must
immediately stop entering into new
Derivatives and contact the applicable
Regional Director regarding the change
of condition. In this example, an FCU
could subsequently apply for Derivative
authority under the application process.
Another example would be if an
FCU’s asset size drops below $500
million. As with the previous example,
the FCU must immediately stop entering
into new Derivatives and contact the
applicable Regional Director regarding
the change of condition. The FCU can
subsequently apply for Derivative
authority under the application process.
An FCU must also notify the
applicable Regional Director if it
determines its approved application is
inaccurate. An application would be
rendered inaccurate if an FCU no longer
meets the operational support
requirements in the proposed § 703.106.
These requirements are focused on an
FCU’s management capabilities and the
FCU’s required reviews. For example, if
an FCU no longer has qualified
Derivative personnel required by the
proposed rule, it would be required to
immediately stop entering into new
Derivatives and contact the applicable
Regional Director regarding the change
of condition. The proposed rule would
not require an FCU to notify the
applicable Regional Director on the
basis of staff turnover if the FCU still
meets the qualified personnel in the
operational support requirements
section.
Section 703.109 Regulatory Violation
or Unsafe and Unsound Condition
The Board is retaining the provisions
of the current rule for regulatory
violations when an FCU no longer meets
the requirements of this subpart or its
internal polices, in that such an FCU
must immediately stop entering into any
new Derivative transactions. However,
the determination of the regulatory
violation will be made by the applicable
Regional Director, who will provide
written notice to the credit union.
The Board is proposing changes for
Regulatory violations to include when
an FCU is operating in an unsafe or
unsound condition and establish that
the applicable Regional Director will
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
determine whether a regulatory
violation has occurred. If the applicable
Regional Director determines that the
credit union is operating in an unsafe or
unsound condition the applicable
Regional Director may prohibit an FCU
from engaging in Derivatives
transactions. If the applicable Regional
Director renders such a determination,
he or she will provide the FCU written
notice that includes the reason for such
determination.
The Board believes the principlesbased approach of the proposed rule
creates greater responsibility on an
FCU’s senior executive officers, who are
responsible for ensuring that the
Derivative program is properly and
safely addressed in the credit union’s
internal controls, policies, and
procedures.
D. Other Affected Parts
In addition to the aforementioned
changes, the Board is also proposing to
amend parts 741 and 746.
Section 741.219 Investment
requirements [Amended]
The Board is proposing to maintain
the notification requirement for FISCUs.
However, the proposal adjusts the
timeframe for a FISCU to notify the
NCUA of its Derivatives activity. The
2014 final rule required a FISCU to
notify the NCUA at least 30 days before
it begins engaging in Derivatives. The
Board is proposing to amend this to
require a FISCU to notify the NCUA
within five business days after entering
into its first Derivatives transaction.
The Board believes that adjusting the
notification to occur after a FISCU
enters into its first Derivatives
transaction will provide the applicable
Regional Director more certainty for
planning examiner time and specialists
resources. The Board is proposing that
this notification will not be required for
transactions covered under § 703.14 for
loan pipeline management.
This amendment would align this
section with the notice provisions
discussed elsewhere in this document
(§ 703.108—Notification and application
requirements) by removing the 30-day
time requirement. The Board is
proposing this change to ensure
consistency between FCUs and FISCUs
that engage in Derivatives and
notifications to NCUA related thereto.
The Board is also proposing to amend
§ 746. 201 to correct a citation that
would change based on the proposed
change to Subpart B to part 703. The
Board notes that this change is strictly
technical, and will not affect the
substance of this section of part 746.
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
IV. Regulatory Procedures
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 (defined for purposes of the
RFA to include credit unions with
assets less than $100 million).29 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 and
publishes its certification and a short,
explanatory statement in the Federal
Register together with the rule.
The proposed rule would amend the
NCUA’s Derivatives rule to shift from a
prescriptive construct to a principlesbased approach. As a result, it would
not cause any increased burden or
impose any new requirements on FICUs.
Accordingly, the NCUA certifies that the
proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small credit
unions.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA) applies to information collection
requirements in which an agency
creates a new paperwork burden on
regulated entities or modifies an
existing burden. For purposes of the
PRA, a paperwork burden may take the
form of a reporting, recordkeeping, or
third-party disclosure requirement, each
referred to as an information collection.
The NCUA may not conduct or sponsor,
and the respondent is not required to
respond to, an information collection
unless it displays a currently valid
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) control number.
The NCUA anticipates more FCUs to
engage in Derivatives, which would
increase the recordkeeping requirement
associated with reports made to the FCU
board and senior executive officers
under § 703.105. This would increase
the number of respondents from 20 to
50. The proposed rule would also
increase the number of FCUs that would
be required to maintain the policies and
procedures annually under § 703.106(c)
from 43 to 50 respondents. These
policies and procedures would also
include the process and responsibility
framework requirements of external
29 See
NCUA Interpretive Ruling and Policy
Statement 87–2, as amended by IRPS 03–2 and IRPS
15–1, 80 FR 57512 (Sept. 24, 2015).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
service providers, eliminating separate
recordkeeping requirement of
§ 703.107(a)(3). Section 703.108(a)
provides for FCUs the meet certain
requirements to provide notification of
its readiness to engage in derivatives in
lieu of an application. An increase is
estimated in the number of FCUs that
would engage in Derivatives from 4 to
15. The NCUA does not anticipate any
increase in the number of FCUs
currently providing applications under
proposed § 703.108(b) annually.
Information collection requirements
previously identified under §§ 703.112
through 703.114 are being removed due
to obsolete reporting. Burden under
these sections had previously been
reported as zero hours. It is estimated
that program changes to the information
collection requirements associated with
this proposed rule increase the burden
by 254 hours.
Adjustments to the information
collection burden are also being made to
include information collection
requirements not previously captured
and to update respondents and response
times to reflect a more accurate and upto-date accounting of the burden.
Adjustments to the information
collection requirements will increase
the burden by 290 hours.
The proposed rule would revise the
information collection requirements
currently approved under OMB number
3133–0133, as follows:
Title of Information Collection:
Investment and Deposit Activities, 12
CFR Part 703.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
50.
Estimated Annual Responses per
Respondent: 23.86.
Estimated Total Annual Responses:
1,193.
Estimated Hours per Response: 0.70.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 839.
Affected Public: Private Section: Notfor-profit institutions.
The NCUA invites comments on: (a)
Whether the collection of information
are necessary for the proper
performance of the agencies’ functions,
including whether the information has
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
estimates of the burden of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the information collection on
respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology;
and (e) estimates of capital or start-up
costs and cost of operations,
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
68497
maintenance, and purchase of services
to provide information.
All comments are a matter of public
record. Due to the limited in-house staff,
email comments are preferred.
Comments regarding the information
collection requirements of this rule
should be (1) mailed to: PRAcomments@
ncua.gov with ‘‘OMB No. 3133–0133’’ in
the subject line; faxed to (703) 837–
2406, or mailed to Dawn Wolfgang,
NCUA PRA Clearance Officer, National
Credit Union Administration, 1775
Duke Street, Suite 6032, Alexandria, VA
22314, and to the (2) Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, at
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
Select ‘‘Currently under 30-day
Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or
by using the search function.
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, the
NCUA, an independent regulatory
agency as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5),
voluntarily complies with the principles
of 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. The NCUA has
determined that this proposed rule does
not constitute a policy that has
federalism implications for purposes of
the executive order.
Assessment of Federal Regulations and
Policies on Families
The NCUA has determined that this
proposed rule will not affect family
well-being within the meaning of
section 654 of the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999,
Public Law 105–277, 112 Stat. 2681
(1998).
List of Subjects
12 CFR Part 701
Advertising, Aged, Civil rights, Credit,
Credit unions, Fair housing, Individuals
with disabilities, Insurance, Marital
status discrimination, Mortgages,
Religious discrimination, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sex
discrimination, Signs and symbols,
Surety bonds.
12 CFR Part 703
Credit unions, Investments, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
68498
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
for separately from the host contract are
addressed in § 703.103(c) of this part.
■ 6. Revise Subpart B to part 703 to read
as follows:
12 CFR Part 741
Bank deposit insurance, Credit
unions, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
12 CFR Part 746
Administrative practice and
procedure, Claims, Credit unions,
Investigations.
By the National Credit Union
Administration Board on October 15, 2020.
Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks,
Secretary of the Board.
For the reasons discussed above, the
Board is proposing to amend 12 CFR
parts 701, 703, 741, and 746 as follows:
PART 701—ORGANIZATION AND
OPERATION OF FEDERAL CREDIT
UNIONS
§ 703.101
Purpose and scope.
4. Amend § 703.2 by removing the
definition ‘‘Derivative.’’
■ 5. Amend § 703.14 by revising
paragraph (k) and adding paragraph (l)
to read as follows:
(a) Purpose. This subpart grants
Federal credit unions limited authority
to enter into Derivatives only for the
purpose of managing Interest Rate Risk.
(b) Scope. This subpart applies to all
Federal credit unions. Except as
provided in § 741.219, this rule does not
apply to federally insured, statechartered credit unions.
(c) Prior Approvals. Any Federal
credit union with an active approval,
under the prior version of this subpart,
on [EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE]
is subject to the provisions of this
subpart and is no longer subject to the
restrictions, limits, or terms contained
in the Federal credit union’s approved
application.
(d) Pending Approvals. Any
application for Derivatives authority
pending on [EFFECTIVE DATE OF
FINAL RULE], except for such
applications submitted by a Federal
credit union that would be subject to the
requirements of § 703.108(b) of this
subpart, is deemed to be withdrawn and
such applicant is subject to the
provisions of this subpart.
§ 703.14
§ 703.102
1. The authority citation for part 701
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1752(5), 1755, 1756,
1757, 1758, 1759, 1761a, 1761b, 1766, 1767,
1782, 1784, 1786, 1787, 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.
§ 701.21
[Amended]
2. Amend § 701.21 by removing
paragraph (i).
■
PART 703—INVESTMENT AND
DEPOSIT ACTIVITIES
3. The authority citation for part 703
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1757(7), 1757(8),
1757(15).
§ 703.2
[Amended]
■
Permissible investments.
*
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Subpart B—Derivatives Authority
Sec.
703.101 Purpose and scope.
703.102 Definitions.
703.103 Requirements related to the
characteristics of permissible interest
rate risk Derivatives.
703.104 Requirements for counterparty
agreements, collateral and Margining.
703.105 Reporting requirements.
703.106 Operational support requirements.
703.107 External service providers.
703.108 Notification and application
requirements.
703.109 Regulatory violation or unsafe and
unsound condition.
*
*
*
*
(k) Loan pipeline management. A
Federal credit union may enter into the
following transactions related to the
management of its loan pipeline:
(1) Interest rate lock commitments
and forward sales commitments; and
(2) Transactions to manage interest
rate exposure.
(l) Embedded options. A Federal
credit union may enter into embedded
options not required under generally
accepted accounting principles (GAAP)
adopted in the United States to be
accounted for separately from the host
contract. Embedded options that are
required, under GAAP, to be accounted
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
Definitions.
For purposes of this subpart:
Counterparty means a swap dealer (as
defined by the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission in 17 CFR 1.3),
Derivatives clearing organization (as
defined by the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission in 17 CFR 1.3), or
central financial clearing market
(exchange) that participates as the other
party in a Derivatives transaction with
a Federal credit union;
Domestic Counterparty means a
counterparty domiciled in the United
States;
Domestic Interest Rates means
interest rates derived in the United
States and are U.S. dollar denominated;
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Derivative means a financial contract
that derives its value from the value and
performance of some other underlying
financial instrument or variable, such as
an index or interest rate;
Earnings at Risk means the changes to
earnings, typically in the short term (for
example, 12 to 36 months), caused by
changes in interest rates;
Economic Effectiveness means the
extent to which a Derivatives
transaction results in offsetting changes
in the Interest Rate Risk that the
transaction was, and is, intended to
provide;
External Service Provider means any
entity that provides services to assist a
Federal credit union in carrying out its
Derivatives program and the
requirements of this subpart;
Interest Rate Cap means a contract,
based on a reference interest rate, for
payment to the purchaser when the
reference interest rate rises above the
level specified in the contract;
Interest Rate Floor means a contract,
based on a reference interest rate, for
payment to the purchaser when the
reference interest rate falls below the
level specified in the contract;
Interest Rate Risk means the current
and prospective risk to a credit union’s
capital and earnings arising from
movements in interest rates.
Margin means the minimum amount
of eligible collateral, as defined in
§ 703.104(c), that must be deposited
between parties to a Derivatives
transaction, as detailed in a Master
Services Agreement;
Master Services Agreement means a
document agreed upon between two
parties that sets out standard terms that
apply to all transactions entered into
between those parties. The most
common form of a Master Services
Agreement for Derivatives is an
International Swap Dealer Association
(ISDA) Master Agreement
Net Economic Value means the
measurement of changes in the
economic value of Net Worth caused by
changes in interest rates;
Net Worth has the meaning specified
in part 702 of this chapter;
Novation means the substitution of an
old obligation with a new one that
either replaces an existing obligation
with a new obligation or replaces an
original party with a new party;
Reference Interest Rate means the
index or rate to be used as the variable
rate for resetting Derivatives
transactions;
Regional Director means an NCUA
Regional Director or the Director of the
Office of National Examinations and
Supervision;
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Senior Executive Officer has the
meaning specified in § 701.14 of this
chapter and any other similar employee
that is directly within the chain of
command for the oversight of a Federal
credit union’s Derivatives program;
Structured Liability Offering means a
share product created by a Federal
credit union with contractual option
features, such as periodic caps and calls,
similar to those found in structured
securities or structured notes;
Threshold Amount means an
unsecured credit exposure that a party
to a Derivatives transaction is prepared
to accept before requesting additional
eligible collateral, as defined in
§ 703.104(c), from the other party;
Trade Date means the date that a
Derivatives order (new transactions,
terminations, or assignments) is
executed with a counterparty; and
Written Options means an option
where compensation has been received
and the Domestic Counterparty has the
right, not obligation, to exercise the
option on a future date(s).
§ 703.103 Requirements related to the
characteristics of permissible interest rate
risk Derivatives.
(a) A Federal credit union may only
enter into Derivatives, under this
subpart that have the following
characteristics:
(1) Denominated in U.S. dollars;
(2) Based on Domestic Interest Rates
or the U.S. dollar-denominated London
Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR);
(3) A contract maturity equal to or less
than 15 years, as of the Trade Date; and
(4) Not used to create Structured
Liability Offerings for members or
nonmembers.
(b) A Federal credit union may not
engage in Written Options. Examples of
Written Options include swaptions,
interest rate caps and interest rate floors.
(c) A Federal credit union may not
engage in embedded options required
under U.S. Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (GAAP) to be
accounted for separately from the host
contract.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 703.104 Requirements for counterparty
agreements, collateral and Margining.
To enter into Derivatives transactions
under this subpart, a Federal credit
union must:
(a) Have an executed Master Services
Agreement with a Domestic
Counterparty. Such agreement must be
reviewed by counsel with expertise in
similar types of transactions to ensure
the agreement reasonably protects the
interests of the Federal credit union;
(b) Utilize contracted Margin
requirements with a maximum Margin
threshold amount of $250,000; and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
(c) Accept as eligible collateral, for
Margin requirements, only the
following: Cash (U.S. dollars), U.S.
Treasuries, government-sponsored
enterprise debt, U.S. government agency
debt, government-sponsored enterprise
residential mortgage-backed security
pass-through securities, and U.S.
government agency residential
mortgage-backed security pass-through
securities.
§ 703.105
Reporting requirements.
(a) Board reporting. At least quarterly,
a Federal credit union’s Senior
Executive Officers must deliver a
comprehensive Derivatives report, as
described in paragraph (c) of this
section to the Federal credit union’s
board of directors.
(b) Senior Executive Officer and asset
liability or similarly functioning
committee. At least monthly, Federal
credit union staff must deliver a
comprehensive Derivatives report, as
described in paragraph (c) of this
section to the Federal credit union’s
Senior Executive Officers and, if
applicable, the Federal credit union’s
asset liability or similarly functioning
committee.
(c) Comprehensive Derivatives
management report. At a minimum, the
reports required in paragraphs (a) and
(b) of this section must include:
(1) Identification of any areas of
noncompliance with any provision of
this subpart or the Federal credit
union’s policies, and the planned
remediation of such noncompliance;
(2) An itemization of the Federal
credit union’s individual transactions
subject to this subpart, the current
values of such transactions, and each
individual transaction’s intended use
for Interest Rate Risk mitigation;
(3) A comprehensive view of the
Federal credit union’s risk reports,
including, but not limited to, Interest
Rate Risk calculations with details of
the transactions subject to this subpart.
(d) Reports required by this section
must, at a minimum, be retained in
accordance with the requirements in
Appendix A to part 749.
(e) Notification of any noncompliance
as part of the Derivatives management
report required in paragraph (c)(1) of
this section must be submitted to the
applicable Regional Director
immediately after it has been submitted
to the Federal credit union’s board of
directors.
(f) The NCUA may, at any time,
request the Derivatives management
report required by paragraph (c) of this
section.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
68499
§ 703.106 Operational support
requirements.
(a) Required experience and
competencies. A Federal credit union
using Derivative transactions subject to
this subpart must internally possess the
following experience and competencies:
(1) Board. (i) Before entering into the
initial Derivatives transaction, a Federal
credit union’s board members must
receive training that provides a general
understanding of the Derivative
transactions, and the knowledge
required to provide strategic oversight of
the Federal credit union’s Derivatives
program.
(ii) Any person that becomes a board
member after the initial Derivatives
transaction must receive the same
training as required by paragraph
(a)(1)(i) of this section.
(iii) At least annually after the initial
Derivatives transaction, as part of the
Derivatives reporting requirement in
§ 703.105(a), the Federal credit union’s
Senior Executive Officers must brief the
board on the Federal credit union’s use
of Derivatives to manage Interest Rate
Risk.
(2) Senior executive officers. A
Federal credit union’s Senior Executive
Officers must be able to understand,
approve, and provide oversight for the
Derivatives program. These individuals
must have a comprehensive
understanding of how the Derivative
transactions fit into the Federal credit
union’s Interest Rate Risk management
process.
(3) Qualified Derivatives personnel.
To engage in the Derivative transactions,
a Federal credit union must employ staff
with experience in the following areas:
(i) Asset/liability risk management.
Staff must be qualified to understand
and oversee asset/liability risk
management, including the appropriate
role of the transactions subject to this
subpart. Staff must also be qualified to
understand and undertake or oversee
the appropriate modeling and analytics
related to Net Economic Value and
Earnings at Risk;
(ii) Accounting and financial
reporting. Staff must be qualified to
understand and oversee appropriate
accounting and financial reporting for
Derivatives in accordance GAAP;
(iii) Derivatives execution and
oversight. Staff must be qualified to
undertake or oversee Derivative trade
executions; and
(iv) Counterparty, collateral, and
Margin management. Staff must be
qualified to evaluate counterparty,
collateral, and Margin risk as described
in § 703.104 of this subpart.
(b) Required review and internal
controls structure. To effectively
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
68500
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
manage the transactions subject to this
subpart, a Federal credit union must
assess the effectiveness of its
management and internal controls
structure. At a minimum, the internal
controls structure must include:
(1) Transaction review. Before
executing any transaction, a Federal
credit union must identify and
document the circumstances that lead to
the decision to execute a transaction,
specify the strategy the Federal credit
union will employ, and demonstrate the
economic effectiveness of the
transaction;
(2) Internal controls review. Within
the first year after commencing its first
Derivatives transaction, a Federal credit
union must have an internal controls
review that is focused on the integration
and introduction of the program, and
ensure the timely identification of
weaknesses in internal controls,
accounting, and all operational and
oversight processes. This review must
be performed by an independent
external unit or, if applicable, the
Federal credit union’s internal auditor;
(3) Financial statement audit. Any
Federal credit union engaging in
Derivatives transactions pursuant to this
subpart must obtain an annual financial
statement audit, as defined in § 715.2(d)
of this chapter, and be compliant with
GAAP for all Derivatives-related
accounting and reporting;
(4) Collateral management review.
Before executing its first Derivative
transaction, a Federal credit union must
establish a collateral management
process that monitors a Federal credit
union’s collateral and Margining
requirements and ensures that its
transactions are collateralized in
accordance with the collateral
requirements of this subpart and a
Federal credit union’s Master Services
Agreement with its counterparty; and
(5) Liquidity review. Before executing
its first Derivative transaction, a Federal
credit union must establish a liquidity
review process to analyze and measure
potential liquidity needs related to its
Derivatives program and the additional
collateral requirements due to changes
in interest rates. The Federal credit
union must, as part of its liquidity risk
management, calculate and track
contingent liquidity needs in the event
a transaction needs to be novated or
terminated, and must establish effective
controls for liquidity exposures arising
from both market or product liquidity
and instrument cash flows.
(6) Separation of duties. A Federal
credit union’s process, whether
conducted internally or by an external
service provider, must have appropriate
separation of duties for the following
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
functions defined in subsection (a)(3) of
this section:
(i) Asset/liability risk management;
(ii) Accounting and financial
reporting;
(iii) Derivatives execution and
oversight; and
(iv) Counterparty, collateral, and
Margin management
(c) Policies and procedures. A Federal
credit union using Derivatives,
permitted under this subpart, must
operate according to comprehensive
written policies and procedures for
control, measurement, and management
of Derivative transactions. At a
minimum, the policies and procedures
must address the requirements of this
subpart and any additional limitations
imposed by the Federal credit union’s
board of directors. A Federal credit
union’s board of directors must review
the policies and procedures described in
this section at least annually and update
them when necessary.
§ 703.107
External service providers.
(a) General. A Federal credit union
using Derivatives may use external
service providers to support or conduct
aspects of its Derivative management
program, provided:
(1) The external service provider,
including affiliates, does not:
(i) Act as a counterparty to any
Derivative transactions that involve the
Federal credit union;
(ii) Act as a principal or agent in any
Derivative transactions that involve the
Federal credit union; or
(iii) Have discretionary authority to
execute any of the Federal credit
union’s Derivative transactions.
(2) The Federal credit union has the
internal capacity, experience, and skills
to oversee and manage any external
service providers it uses; and
(3) The Federal credit union
documents the specific uses of external
service providers in its policies and
procedures, as described in § 703.106(c)
of this subpart.
(b) This section does not alleviate the
responsibility of the Federal credit
union to employ qualified staff in
accordance with § 703.106 of this
subpart.
§ 703.108 Notification and application
requirements.
(a) Notification. A Federal credit
union that meets the following
requirements must notify the applicable
Regional Director in writing within five
business days after entering into its first
Derivatives transaction:
(1) The Federal credit union’s most
recent NCUA Management component
is a rating of 1 or 2; and
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(2) The Federal credit union has
assets of at least $500 million as of its
most recent call report.
(b) Application. A Federal credit
union that does not meet the
requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) and/or
(2) of this section must obtain approval
before engaging in Derivatives under
this subpart from its applicable Regional
Director, by submitting an application,
that, at a minimum, includes the
following:
(1) An Interest Rate Risk mitigation
plan that shows how Derivatives are one
aspect of the Federal credit union’s
overall Interest Rate Risk mitigation
strategy, and an analysis showing how
the Federal credit union will use
Derivatives in conjunction with other
on-balance sheet instruments and
strategies to effectively manage its
Interest Rate Risk;
(2) A list of the Derivatives products
and characteristics of such products the
Federal credit union is planning to use;
(3) Draft policies and procedures that
the Federal credit union has prepared in
accordance with § 703.106 of this
subpart;
(4) How the Federal credit union
plans to acquire, employ, and/or create
the resources, policies, processes,
systems, internal controls, modeling,
experience, and competencies to meet
the requirements of this subpart. This
includes a description of how the
Federal credit union will ensure that
Senior Executive Officers, the board of
directors, and personnel have the
knowledge and experience in
accordance with the requirements of
this subpart;
(5) A description of how the Federal
credit union intends to use external
service providers as part of its
Derivatives program, and a list of the
name(s) of and service(s) provided by
the External Service Providers, as
described in § 703.107 of this subpart, it
intends to use;
(6) A description of how the Federal
credit union will support the operations
of Margining and collateral, as described
in § 703.104 of this subpart;
(7) A description of how the Federal
credit union will comply with the
accounting and financial reporting in
GAAP; and
(8) Any additional information
requested by the Regional Director.
(c) Application review. (1) After the
applicable Regional Director has
completed his or her review, including
any requests for additional information,
the Regional Director will notify the
Federal credit union in writing of his or
her decision. Any denials will include
the reason(s) for such denial. A Federal
credit union subject to paragraph (b) of
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
this section may not enter into any
Derivative transactions under this
subpart until it receives approval from
the applicable Regional Director. At a
Regional Director’s discretion, a Federal
credit union may reapply if its initial
application is denied.
(2) A Federal credit union that
receives a denial of its application may
appeal such decision in accordance
with part 746 of the NCUA’s
regulations.
(d) Change in condition. A Federal
credit union must immediately cease
entering into any new Derivatives and
contact the applicable Regional Director,
if the Federal credit union experiences
a change in condition such that it no
longer meets the requirements of
paragraph (a) of this section or renders
its approved application inaccurate. The
applicable Regional Director may take
all necessary actions, including, but not
limited to, revoking a Federal credit
union’s authority to engage in
Derivatives and/or requiring divesture
of current Derivatives.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 703.109 Regulatory violation or unsafe
and unsound condition.
(a) Upon determination by the
applicable Regional Director, and
written notice by the same, a Federal
credit union that: No longer meets the
requirements of this subpart; if
applicable, fails to comply with its
approved application; or is operating in
an unsafe or unsound condition must
immediately stop entering into any new
Derivative transactions until the Federal
credit union is notified by the
applicable Regional Director that it is
permitted to resume engaging in
transactions under this subpart.
(b) If the applicable Regional Director
renders an unsafe or unsound condition
in their determination, he or she will
provide the Federal credit union as part
of the written notice the reason(s) for
such determination.
(c) During this period, however, the
Federal credit union may terminate
existing Derivative transactions. A
Regional Director may permit a Federal
credit union to enter into offsetting
transactions if he or she determines
such transactions are part of a corrective
action strategy; and
(d) A Federal credit union that
receives written notice under this
section may appeal such determination
in accordance with part 746 of the
NCUA’s regulations.
PART 741—REQUIREMENTS FOR
INSURANCE
7. The authority citation for part 741
continues to read as follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1757, 1766(a), 1781–
1790, and 1790d; 31 U.S.C. 3717.
8. Amend § 741.219 by revising
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
■
§ 741.219
Investment requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Any credit union which is insured
pursuant to title II of the Act must notify
the applicable NCUA Regional Director
in writing within five business days
after entering into its first Derivatives
transaction. Such transactions do not
include those included in § 703.14 of
this chapter.
PART 746—APPEALS PROCEDURES
9. The authority citation for part 746
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1766, 1787, and 1789.
10. Amend § 746.201 by revising
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
■
§ 746.201
Authority, purpose, and scope.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Scope. This subpart covers the
appeal of initial agency determinations
by a program office which the petitioner
has a right to appeal to the NCUA Board
under the following regulations:
§§ 701.14(e), 701.21(h)(3), 701.22(c),
701.23(h)(3), 701.32(b)(5), and
701.34(a)(4), appendix A to part 701 of
this chapter, appendix B to part 701 of
this chapter, Chapters 1 through 4,
§§ 703.20(d), 703.108(b), 705.10(a),
708a.108(d), 708a.304(h), 708a.308(d),
709.7, 741.11(d), and 745.201(c),
subpart J to part 747 of this chapter, and
§ 750.6(b).
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2020–23968 Filed 10–28–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7535–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2020–0915; Project
Identifier AD–2020–00661–Q]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Rockwell
Collins, Inc., Global Positioning
Systems
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
The FAA proposes to adopt a
new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Rockwell Collins, Inc. (Rockwell
Collins), GPS–4000S Global Positioning
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
68501
Systems (GPS) installed on airplanes.
This proposed AD was prompted by an
un-annunciated GPS position error,
which could cause a misleading
localizer performance with vertical
guidance (LPV) glidepath, resulting in
controlled flight into terrain (CFIT).
This proposed AD would require
upgrading the GPS–4000S. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.
DATES: The FAA must receive comments
on this proposed AD by December 14,
2020.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this NPRM, contact Rockwell Collins,
Inc., 400 Collins Road NE, Cedar
Rapids, IA 52498; phone: 319–295–
5000; email: customersupport@
rockwellcollins.com; internet: https://
www.rockwellcollins.com/. You may
view this service information at the
FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust,
Kansas City, MO 64106. For information
on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 816–329–4148. It is also
available on the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2020–
0915.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2020–
0915; or in person at Docket Operations
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The AD docket contains this NPRM, any
comments received, and other
information. The street address for
Docket Operations is listed in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Rau, Aerospace Engineer, Wichita ACO
Branch, FAA, 1801 Airport Road,
Wichita, Kansas 67209; phone: 316–
E:\FR\FM\29OCP1.SGM
29OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 210 (Thursday, October 29, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68487-68501]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23968]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 68487]]
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION
12 CFR Part 701, 703, 741, and 746
RIN 3133-AF29
Derivatives
AGENCY: National Credit Union Administration (NCUA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The NCUA Board (Board) is proposing to amend the NCUA's
Derivatives rule. This proposed rule is intended to modernize the
NCUA's Derivatives rule and make it more principles-based. This
proposal retains key safety and soundness components, while providing
more flexibility for federal credit unions (FCUs) to manage their
interest rate risk (IRR) through the use of Derivatives. The changes
included in this proposal would streamline the regulation and expand
credit unions' authority to purchase and use Derivatives for the
purpose of managing IRR. This proposal also reorganizes rule content
related to loan pipeline management into one section, which will aid in
readability and clarity.
DATES: Comments must be received by December 28, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments, identified by RIN 3133-
AF29, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
[cir] Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: 703-518-6319
[cir] Include ``[Your Name]--Comments on Proposed Rule:
Derivatives'' on the transmittal cover page.
Mail: Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks, Secretary of the Board,
National Credit Union Administration, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria,
Virginia 22314-3428.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as mail address.
Please send comments by one method only.
Public Inspection: You may view all public comments as submitted on
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov, except
those that cannot be posted for technical reasons. The NCUA will not
edit or remove any identifying or contact information from submitted
public comments. Due to social distancing measures in effect, the usual
opportunity to inspect paper copies of comments in the NCUA's law
library is not currently available. After social distancing measures
are relaxed, visitors may make an appointment to review paper copies by
calling 703-518-6540 or emailing [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Policy and Analysis: Tom Fay, Capital
Markets Manager, Office of Examination and Insurance, 703-518-1179;
Legal: Justin Anderson, Senior Staff Attorney, Office of General
Counsel, 703-518-6540; or by mail at National Credit Union
Administration, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
As discussed throughout the remainder of this document, the Board
is proposing to modernize its Derivatives \1\ rule by progressing from
a prescriptive construct to a more expansive, principles-based
approach. The Board believes the proposed amendments will make it
easier and more efficient for FCUs to manage IRR with Derivatives while
maintaining the necessary safety and soundness controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The term ``Derivatives'' is defined in both the current rule
and this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Background
In 2014, the Board finalized the NCUA's current Derivatives
rule,\2\ which only applies to FCUs.\3\ Before finalization of the
current Derivatives rule, FCUs could only use Derivatives to hedge real
estate loans produced for sale on the secondary market; hedge interest
rate lock or forward sales commitments for loans that the FCU
originated; or fund dividend payments on member share certificates
where the share certificate rate was tied to an equity index.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 79 FR 5228 (Jan. 31, 2014).
\3\ As of this proposal, to use Derivatives, federally insured,
state-chartered credit unions must have authority from the
applicable state regulator (explicit authority or case-by-case
authority).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beginning in 1999, however, the Board had approved several IRR
Derivative pilot programs. The pilot programs, which remained active
until the 2014 rulemaking, provided important insight into the safety
and efficacy of the use of Derivatives in managing IRR over a
significant time horizon that included periods of both rising and
falling interest rates.
As noted above, in 2014, the Board, based largely on its experience
observing the successful use of Derivatives through the pilot programs,
finalized the current Derivatives rule. As noted in the preamble in the
proposed and final versions of that rule, the Board concluded that it
was both safe and beneficial to authorize the use of Derivatives for
managing IRR.
The scope of the 2014 final rule was intentionally prescriptive,
given most FCUs' lack of experience using Derivatives for IRR
management and the NCUA's need to increase its specialized expertise to
manage and supervise the use of such instruments and the accompanying
application process included in the rule. The prescriptiveness of the
final rule enabled the Board to safely expand Derivatives authority
while also ensuring that FCUs which engaged in Derivatives did not pose
an undue safety and soundness risk to themselves, the broader credit
union industry, or the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund (the
Fund). As such, the 2014 final rule included a number of restrictions
on Derivative authorities. These included, but were not limited to,
discrete limits on the types of Derivative products an FCU could
purchase; requiring FCUs to receive NCUA preapproval before engaging in
Derivatives; and regulatory limits on the amounts of Derivatives an FCU
could hold relative to its net worth.
Since 2014, the NCUA has received many applications from FCUs and
notifications from federally insured, state-charted credit unions
(FISCUs) \4\ planning to use Derivatives to manage IRR. As of June
2020, approximately 30% of all FCUs with an approved Derivatives
application and FISCUs that have notified the NCUA of their use of
Derivatives have outstanding Derivative transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ FISCUs are required to notify the NCUA; they are not
required to receive NCUA approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 68488]]
Under the current rule, the Board and staff have gained critical
knowledge and experience through oversight of credit unions actively
using Derivatives. This experience has helped the NCUA streamline the
focus of its examinations while also identifying areas where additional
regulatory relief could be granted safely. Many of these relief items
were included as part of the Board's December 2018 Regulatory Reform
Agenda; \5\ most of those items are included in this proposed rule. The
Board notes that comments from the Regulatory Reform Agenda were
generally supportive of a principles-based approach for permissible
Derivative products for FCUs managing IRR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 83 FR 65926 (Dec. 21, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the observable safe and effective management of Derivatives
by credit unions since the 2014 final rule, the Board believes it is
appropriate to modernize the Derivatives rule to expand the Derivatives
authority for FCUs and shift the regulation toward a more principles-
based approach. In developing this proposed rule, the Board carefully
considered the risks Derivatives pose, contemporary developments in the
marketplace, and the NCUA's experiences with credit unions using
Derivatives. While using Derivatives to manage IRR, the Board reminds
credit unions that Derivatives are not a panacea for managing market
risks. Derivatives, when used responsibly, are only a part of a credit
union's IRR framework. Credit unions will still require appropriate
risk management by experienced staff, as well as suitable policies,
procedures, and management oversight. Further, the Board reminds credit
unions that implicit in a principles-based approach is the expectation
that FCUs will maintain strong prudential controls around their
Derivative use at all times.
The Board remains committed to the principle that any authorized
Derivative activity should be limited to the purpose of mitigating IRR
within a discreet hedging strategy, and may not be used to increase
risks deliberately or conduct any otherwise speculative transactions.
This proposal continues to authorize Derivative activity by FCUs that
demonstrate risk characteristics highly correlated to the FCU's assets
and liabilities, such that Derivatives would be an efficient and
effective risk mitigation tool.
For the reasons stated above, the Board is proposing to amend the
Derivatives rule as described in the following sections. The Board
believes these changes will provide regulatory relief in a safe and
sound manner for credit unions choosing to utilize Derivatives as part
of their IRR mitigation strategy.
III. Proposed Rule
As described in more detail below, the Board is proposing to make
numerous changes to the Derivatives rule, both substantive and
technical. The proposed changes make the Derivatives rule less
prescriptive and more principles based. Significant elements of this
proposal include eliminating the preapproval process for FCUs that are
complex with a Management CAMEL component rating of 1or 2; eliminating
the specific product permissibility; and eliminating the regulatory
limits on the amount of Derivatives an FCU may purchase.
The aforementioned changes, as well as proposed changes to other
sections of the NCUA's regulations and less significant changes to the
Derivatives rule are described in the following section-by-section
analysis.
A. Part 701
The Board is proposing to remove paragraph (i) from Sec. 701.21 to
consolidate it with related provisions without intending any
substantive change. This section currently allows FCUs to purchase put
options to manage increased IRR for real estate loans produced for sale
on the secondary market. A put option is a financial options contract
which entitles the holder to sell, entirely at the holder's option, a
specific quantity of a security at the specified price at or before the
stated expiration date of the contract. Using put options in the manner
permitted by Sec. 701.21(i) is a form of loan pipeline management.
Loan pipeline management involves transactions that are made to protect
an FCU from the changes in the value of loans between origination and
sale.
The Board is proposing to move the authority in Sec. 701.21(i) to
a revised Sec. 703.14(k) (discussed in more detail in subsection B of
this section). The Board's intent in proposing to move this paragraph
is to consolidate all loan pipeline management into one paragraph and
to use a principles-based approach for this activity. The Board notes
that this proposed change would not eliminate or change this authority
for FCUs.
B. Subpart A to Part 703
The Board is proposing to revise paragraph (k) of Sec. 703.14.
This section currently lists permissible Derivative activities for
FCUs. This section includes a list of permissible Derivatives, the
majority of which are addressed in subpart B to part 703 or elsewhere
in the NCUA's regulations. As such, this section only grants unique
authority for interest rate lock commitments or forward sales
commitments made in connection with a loan originated by an FCU. The
Board is proposing to revise Sec. 703.14(k) to only address
transactions for loan pipeline management, which would include the
purchase of put options permissible in the current Sec. 701.21(i) and
interest rate lock commitments or forward sales commitments made in
connection with a loan originated by an FCU in the current Sec.
703.14(k). In addition to the current permissible transactions for loan
pipeline management, the proposed revision to Sec. 703.14(k) would
allow other transactions as long as they are for managing interest rate
exposure of the FCU's loan pipeline.
Due to the revised purpose of the paragraph, the Board is proposing
to remove Sec. 703.14(k)(1), which refers to the activities in Sec.
701.21(i), Sec. 703.14(g), and subpart B. As discussed previously, the
Board is proposing to move the authority in Sec. 701.21(i) to a
revised Sec. 703.14(k). Section 703.14(g) permits FCUs to purchase
European financial option contracts to fund the payment of dividends on
member share certificates where the dividend rate is tied to an equity
index. While the reference in Sec. 703.14(k)(1) to subparagraph (g)
will be removed, the Board notes that it is not making any changes to
the aforementioned subparagraph. Subpart B is the Derivative authority
addressed below.
As such, the Board believes Sec. 703.14(k)(1) is no longer
necessary, because the revised paragraph (k) would only address
instruments for loan pipeline management and not a broader Derivative
authority. The Board notes that this proposed revision is technical in
nature and does not change an FCU's current Derivative authority.
For similar reasons to the proposed removal of Sec. 703.14(k)(1),
the Board is proposing to move Sec. 703.14(k)(2) to a new subsection
(l). This new subsection will retain the authority for FCUs to enter
into transactions where Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)
do not require the embedded options to be accounted separately from the
host contract.
Further, the Board notes that this authority contains an implicit
prohibition on FCUs entering into embedded options where GAAP requires
the option to be accounted for separately from the host contract. The
Board notes that such transactions would be considered Derivatives. As
[[Page 68489]]
discussed in more detail below, the Board is proposing to make this
prohibition explicit in subpart B to part 703. The Board believes this
change is clarifying in nature and is not intended to make a
substantive change.
The proposed revision would continue to allow FCUs to enter into
transactions related to the management of their loan pipeline without
limiting the activity to specified transaction types. The current Sec.
703.14(k)(3) specifies that FCUs can enter into interest rate lock
commitments or forward sales commitments made in connection with a loan
originated by an FCU. Consistent with proposed changes to subpart B,
the Board is making this paragraph principles-based by not specifying
product types, which will allow FCUs more flexibility when managing
their loan pipeline.
Examples of transactions that an FCU might use to protect itself
from IRR between origination and sale include forward sales
commitments, selling ``to be announced'' (TBA),\6\ or purchasing put
options referenced in the current Sec. 701.21(i). These examples would
be permissible under the proposed Sec. 703.14(k). Other transactions
not mentioned would also be permissible if they are related to the
management of interest rate exposure of an FCU's loan pipeline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ To be announced. A forward-settling agency mortgage pass-
through trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Board is aware that GAAP may classify some transactions for
loan pipeline management as Derivatives. Such accounting classification
would not preclude an FCU from engaging in the activity. The Board
would also like to make it clear that a Derivatives transaction for
loan pipeline management would not be subject to the proposed subpart B
of part 703, and the transacting FCU will not be subject to the
requirements of the aforementioned subpart.
The Board is soliciting comments on whether loan pipeline
management should be limited to mortgage loans as opposed to all loans
on an FCUs balance sheet. If so, why should loan pipeline management be
limited to mortgage loans? If not, what types of loans other than
mortgage loans would an FCU manage using the tools in this section?
C. Subpart B to Part 703
Section 703.101 Purpose and Scope
The Board is proposing to retain a majority of the purpose and
scope section in the current Derivatives rule. Specifically, the
purpose and scope section of this proposal would continue to make it
clear that the Derivatives rule only applies to FCUs, except for a
limited provision related to notifications FISCUs provide the NCUA.\7\
In addition, the proposed section continues to make it clear that an
FCU may enter Derivatives under this rule for the exclusive purpose of
managing IRR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Section 703.108 (Notification and application requirements)
addresses FISCU notification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the majority of this section would remain unchanged, the
Board is proposing to eliminate the requirement related to mutual
funds. The Board is proposing to remove the prohibition for mutual
funds to engage in Derivatives if an FCU purchases the mutual fund
under the general investment authority.\8\ The current rule states that
subpart B does not permit FCUs to ``invest in registered investment
companies or collective investment funds under Sec. 703.14(c) of this
part, where the prospectus of the company or fund permit the investment
portfolio to contain Derivatives.'' \9\ In 2014, the Board was
concerned with the risk Derivatives could add to credit unions and the
Fund. The Board believes this prohibition is no longer necessary. The
Board believes a mutual fund can enter into Derivative transactions in
a safe and sound manner as long as the transactions are limited to
managing IRR. This belief stems from the experience the Board gained
from FCUs that have engaged in Derivative transactions since the 2014
final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 12 CFR part 703, subpart A.
\9\ 12 CFR 703.100(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By removing this prohibition, the Board would permit FCUs to invest
in mutual funds that enter into Derivative transactions to manage IRR.
Mutual funds that enter into derivatives to manage IRR are able to
increase or decrease the interest rate sensitivity of the mutual fund,
thereby providing the owners of such fund with the target duration \10\
of the investment that accounts for volatility in interest rates. For
example, a mutual fund may have a target duration of four years, and
the current portfolio has a duration of five years. The mutual fund may
enter into a Derivative transaction to decrease the mutual fund's
duration, which would be a form of IRR management.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Duration is the sensitivity of the price of the mutual fund
to a change in interest rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Board would like to make it clear that mutual funds permissible
for FCUs under the general investment authority will only be permitted
to engage in Derivatives to manage IRR. A mutual fund may not engage in
Derivatives that do not manage IRR. For example, a mutual fund that
purchases Derivatives related to equities, credit, or commodities would
not be permissible for an FCU under the general investment authority.
The Board is also proposing to add two paragraphs to this section
to address FCUs that are currently operating under an approved
application for Derivatives authority or have submitted an application
for Derivatives authority under the current Derivatives rule and are
awaiting a determination. As discussed in the portion of this preamble
addressing Sec. 701.108 of the proposal, the Board is proposing to
eliminate the application requirement for Derivatives authority except
for certain FCUs that do not meet limited conditions. As such, the
proposed new paragraphs in this section would clarify that any FCU with
a current approval would be subject only to the terms and conditions of
a final rule based off this proposal and would no longer be subject to
the requirements included in its approved application. In addition, any
credit union not required to submit an application under this proposal
that has submitted an application under the current Derivatives rule
and is awaiting a determination would be deemed to have such
application withdrawn and would only be subject to the terms and
conditions of a final rule based off of this proposed rule.
If this proposal is finalized, the NCUA would continue to process
any pending application from an FCU that would be required to submit an
application under this proposed rule. The Board notes, however, that
the NCUA would process such application in accordance with the more
flexible standards under this proposal rather than the standards in the
current Derivatives rule.
Section 703.102 Definitions
The Board is proposing to revise several definitions from the
current rule; add new definitions; remove definitions that are no
longer applicable to this proposed rule; and retain definitions from
the current rule with no changes.
The Board is proposing to modify the definitions of the following
terms in the current Derivatives rule:
Counterparty;
Interest Rate Risk;
Margin;
Master Service Agreement;
Net Economic Value;
Senior Executive Officer;
Threshold Amount; and
Trade Date.
The Board is proposing to revise the definition of Counterparty to
include reference to the regulatory citations for the terms ``Swap
dealer'' and ``Derivatives clearing organization.''
[[Page 68490]]
Including these citations in the definition will allow the Board to
remove the definitions for ``Swap dealer'' and ``Derivatives clearing
organization'' in this proposal and the corresponding cross-references.
This change would make the Derivatives rule more user-friendly and aid
in readability.
The Board is proposing to revise the definition of Interest Rate
Risk to make it consistent with the definition used in the Interest
Rate Risk chapter of the NCUA's Examiner's Guide.\11\ The proposed
revision changes ``vulnerability'' to ``current and prospective risk''
and changes ``earnings or economic value'' to ``capital and earnings.''
The Board believes these proposed revisions help better articulate what
IRR is, from the NCUA's perspective. The proposed revised definition of
IRR also removes ``Federal'' when referring to a credit union and
removes ``market'' when referring to interest rates. The Board views
the qualifiers of ``Federal'' and ``market'' as unnecessary, and views
these changes as technical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ https://www.ncua.gov/regulation-supervision/manuals-guides/examiners-guide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Board is proposing to revise the definition of Margin to add
clarity. The proposed revision to Margin changes ``funds'' to
``eligible collateral, as defined by Sec. 703.104(c)'' to make the
definition more user-friendly to the reader. The Board believes readers
can more easily reference eligible collateral with this change through
directing the reader to the section where eligible collateral is
defined. The Board is also proposing to change ``as detailed in a
Master Services Agreement'' to ``as detailed in a credit support annex
or clearing arrangement.'' The Board is proposing this change to
reflect the location of contractual requirements for eligible
collateral, which is contained in the credit support annex for non-
cleared Derivative transactions. The Board considers these changes
clarifications and technical.
The Board is proposing to change the definition of Master Service
Agreement. The proposed revised definition removes the language
regarding the application of the Master Service Agreement to future
transactions with the same counterparty. The Board believes the
reference to future transactions is unnecessary since the Master
Service Agreement, not the NCUA definition, will define the terms of
the agreement.
The Board is proposing to revise the definition of Net Economic
Value. The proposed revision changes ``economic value of assets minus
the economic value of liabilities'' to ``measurement of changes in the
economic value of net worth caused by changes in interest rates.'' As
with the change in the definition of Interest Rate Risk, the proposed
Net Economic Value definition would be consistent with the definition
used in the NCUA's IRR examiner guidance. The Board believes this will
add clarity by providing readers with a consistent definition across
the NCUA's regulatory and supervisory framework.
The Board is proposing to revise the definition of Senior Executive
Officer by removing ``as identified in a Federal credit union's process
and responsibility framework, as discussed in Sec. 703.106(b)(1) of
this subpart.'' The Board is proposing this change, as this proposal
removes the process and responsibility framework referenced in the
definition. The proposed definition for Senior Executive Officer will
still have the meaning as specified in Sec. 701.14 and include any
other similar employee that is directly within the chain of command for
oversight of an FCU's Derivative program. Senior Executive Officers
will continue to have reporting requirements as specified in Sec.
703.105 and be responsible for the operational support requirements in
Sec. 703.106.
The Board is proposing to revise the definition of Threshold Amount
to add clarity to the permissible collateral. The proposed revision
changes ``collateral'' to ``eligible collateral.'' Furthermore, the
proposed revised definition adds a clarifier that eligible collateral
is ``as defined in Sec. 703.104(c).'' The Board believes these changes
will provide clarity to the reader on where to find eligible collateral
type within the proposed rule, and does not believe such change is
material.
Finally, the Board is proposing to revise the definition of Trade
Date to replace the reference to ``in the market'' with ``with the
counterparty.'' The Board believes this change provides specificity to
the definition, because a trade is executed with a counterparty and not
a market.
The Board is proposing to add the following definitions:
Domestic Counterparty;
Domestic Interest Rates;
Earnings at Risk; and
Written Options.
The Board is proposing to add a definition for Domestic
Counterparty. This proposal would define a Domestic Counterparty as a
counterparty domiciled in the United States. This definition is
necessary because the Board is proposing that FCUs can only enter into
Derivatives transactions with Domestic Counterparties.
The Board is proposing to add a definition of Domestic Interest
Rates. This proposal would define Domestic Interest Rates as interest
rates derived in the United States and are U.S. dollar denominated. The
Board is including this definition to ensure there is no ambiguity in
the term Domestic Interest Rates.
The Board is proposing to add a definition for Earnings at Risk.
This proposal would define Earnings at Risk as the changes to earnings,
typically in the short term, caused by changes in interest rates. This
is consistent with the definition in the NCUA's IRR examiner guidance.
This definition is necessary because this is a type of modeling would
be required for an FCU's asset/liability risk management under this
proposed rule.
Finally, the Board is proposing to add a definition for Written
Options. The Board is defining Written Options as options where
compensation has been received and the purchaser has the right, not
obligation, to exercise the option on a future date. This definition is
necessary because the Board is proposing to prohibit Written Options in
this proposed rule.
The Board is proposing to eliminate the following definitions that
appear in the current rule:
Amortizing Notional Amount;
Basis Swap;
Cleared Swap;
Credit Support Annex;
Derivative Clearing Organization;
Exchange;
Fair Value;
Forward Start Date;
Futures;
Futures Commission Merchant (FCM);
Hedge;
Interest Rate Swap;
Introducing Broker;
ISDA Protocol;
Leveraged Derivative;
Minimum Transfer Amount;
Non-cleared;
Notional Amount;
Reporting Date;
Swap Dealer;
Swap Execution Facility; and
Unamortized Premium.
The Board is proposing to remove the above mentioned definitions as
they are no longer relevant in this proposal. Most definitions lose
their relevancy due to the proposal's shift to a principles-based
approach from the more prescriptive approach in the current rule. The
Board is proposing to move the regulatory citations for Derivative
Clearing Organization and Swap Dealer into the
[[Page 68491]]
definition of Counterparty, making these definitions no longer
necessary.
The Board is proposing to retain the following definitions from the
current rule without amendment:
Derivative;
Economic Effectiveness;
External Service Provider;
Field Director; \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The Board is proposing to change ``Field'' to ``Regional''
to better align with the NCUA's other regulations. Such change will
not, however, amend the definition of this term.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interest Rate Cap;
Interest Rate Floor;
Net Worth;
Novation;
Reference Interest Rate; and
Structured Liability Offering.
The Board is proposing to retain the above mentioned definitions
from the current rule because they are still relevant and necessary for
this proposed rule.
Section 703.103 Requirements Related to the Characteristics of
Permissible Interest Rate Derivatives
The Board is proposing to replace the ``Permissible Derivatives''
section of the current rule with the new proposed Sec. 703.103 titled
``Requirements related to the characteristics of permissible interest
rate Derivatives.'' The proposed title change will better reflect the
intent of the section.
As established in the background section of this document, the
Board is proposing to use a principles-based approach with Derivatives
to manage IRR. This approach will replace the prescriptive list of
products permitted and some of the required characteristics in the
current rule.
The Board is proposing that FCUs may use Derivatives to manage IRR,
provided such Derivatives have all of the following characteristics:
Denominated in U.S. dollars;
Based off Domestic Interest Rates or dollar-denominated
London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR); The Board notes that The United
Kingdom Kingdom's Financial Conduct Authority has announced that it
will not guarantee LIBOR's availability beyond the end of 2021, and
risks associated with LIBOR discontinuation could occur prior to the
end of 2021. On July 1, 2020 the FFIEC released a Joint Statement on
Managing the LIBOR Transition, that among other things, highlights
LIBOR transition risks and encourages supervised institutions to
continue their efforts to prepare for and manage associated risks.\13\
As such, the Board will monitor the LIBOR transition and will make any
necessary changes to a final Derivatives rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ https://www.ffiec.gov/press/pr070120.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A contract maturity equal to or less than 15 years, as of
the Trade Date; and
Not used to create Structured Liability Offerings for
members of nonmembers.
All of the characteristics above are in the current Derivatives
rule. Consistent with the current Derivative rule and the limitations
for variable rate investments set in Sec. 703.14(a),\14\ the Board is
proposing to continue to limit permissible indices for Derivatives to
Domestic Interest Rates. In addition, any Derivatives transaction must
be denominated in U.S. dollars. These restrictions are consistent with
the use of Derivatives to manage IRR, as an FCU's IRR is correlated to
changes in domestic interest rates. Further, an FCUs Derivatives
program will be hedging against transactions that are also denominated
in U.S. Dollars.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 12 CFR 703.14(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with the current Derivative rule, the Board is proposing
to keep the current contract maturity limit (15 years, as of the Trade
Date). As with the current rule, the Board believes this will continue
to allow FCUs to effectively hedge various points of the yield curve
for longer-term assets like mortgages, while preventing an excessive
exposure to very long Derivative maturities.
Lastly, the Board is proposing to continue to prohibit Derivatives
to create Structured Liability Offerings for members or nonmembers.\15\
The Board continues to believe this activity is inconsistent with FCUs
managing IRR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ European financial put options are permissible per 12 CFR
703.14(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Board believes the above-mentioned characteristics are
consistent with a principles-based approach while maintaining
guardrails for safety and soundness and consistency with requirement
for Derivatives to be used for managing IRR.
As mentioned in the background section of this document, the Board
is proposing to remove reference to specific product types. The current
Derivative rule allows credit unions to enter into interest rate swaps,
basis swaps, purchased interest rate caps, purchased interest rate
floors, and U.S. Treasury note futures, with some conditions applied.
The proposed rule will allow for all of the specific product types
identified in the current rule, as well as additional product types
that meet the above characteristics.
The Board has found that Derivatives not included in the current
rule would allow FCUs to manage IRR without adding an incremental risk
versus the current rule. For example, an FCU could decide to manage
short-term IRR with Eurodollar futures. This transaction could be done
in a safe and sound manner without adding incremental risk versus a
Derivative that is currently permissible for FCUs.
In addition, the Board is proposing to remove the following
requirements for the characteristics of Derivatives authorized for FCU
use that appear in the current rule:
Forward start date limitations;
Fluctuating notional amount limitations;
Restriction on leveraged Derivatives; and
Meet the definition of Derivative under GAAP.
The Board is removing forward start date limitations in the
proposal because it no longer believes a forward start date beyond 90
days poses an undue risk to an FCU. When making this determination, the
Board considered two potential scenarios, one in which an FCU enters
into a ten-year swap which settles in three days, and one in which an
FCU enters into a ten-year swap which settles in one year. The FCU
would record both swaps on the FCU's financial statements as of trade
date and both will have a contract maturity of 10 years. The major
difference between the two is that cash-flows (excluding Margin
requirements) will not be exchanged in the first year for the swap that
has a longer settlement. The Board no longer believes this extended
settlement would create an undue risk for an FCU, at least no more than
the conventional settlement of an interest rate swap since the price
volatility and modeling for both swaps are similar.
The Board is also proposing to remove the fluctuating notional
amounts limits in the current rule. The Board believes keeping this
limitation would be inconsistent with the new principles-based approach
and would not add any additional safety and soundness protections.
The Board is proposing to remove the restriction on leveraged
Derivatives from the current rule. As discussed in the section below,
the Board is proposing to remove limits on the amount of Derivatives an
FCU can have exposure to. The current restriction on leveraged
Derivatives was included due to the notional limits in the current
rule. Therefore, there is no need for a leveraged Derivative
prohibition if there are no notional limits on Derivatives in this
proposal.
The Board is also proposing to remove the requirement that a
Derivative ``(m)eet the definition of Derivative under GAAP.'' The
Board believes this
[[Page 68492]]
requirement is moot, because all the Derivatives in the proposed rule
would meet the definition of a Derivative under GAAP.
In the process of broadening the Derivative products and
characteristics in this proposal versus the current rule, the Board did
retain one prohibition. The Board is proposing to prohibit an FCU from
engaging in Written Options. This activity is impermissible under the
current Derivative rule. A Written Option would obligate a credit union
to pay the purchaser if the option is in the money \16\ at maturity. If
an FCU were to engage in Written Options, it would receive a payment
from the purchaser. The payment would be the maximum profit the FCU
could realize if the option were to expire with no value. However, the
Written Option could produce losses in excess of the maximum profit an
FCU could realize. The gain/loss profile of an option limits the gain
to the premium the option writer receives at inception of the option.
The loss profile of the option, however, can be multiples of the
premium received from the purchaser. The Board believes this asymmetric
return profile could potentially cause a safety and soundness issue for
an FCU engaging in Written Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Option expires with a positive value at maturity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Board is specifically seeking comment on whether the NCUA
should allow FCUs to engage in Written Options for managing IRR, and
specific scenarios where a Written Option could be used to manage IRR.
The Board is proposing to retain and clarify the current
prohibition on FCUs engaging in embedded options required under GAAP to
be accounted for separately from the host contract. This prohibition is
implicit in the current Sec. 703.14(k)(2). The Board notes that
currently Sec. 703.14(k)(2) permits FCUs to enter into embedded
options where the option is not, under GAAP, required to be accounted
for separately from the host contract. While not explicit the Board has
historically interpreted this provision as also prohibiting FCUs from
engaging in embedded options that are required, under GAAP, to be
accounted for separately from the host contract. For clarity purposes
the Board is making this prohibition explictit rather than implicit and
moving it to this section of the proprosed rule. The Board believes
retaining this prohition is necessary, as these types of derivatives
are overly complex compared to the limited derivatives that are
permissible under the current rule and this proposal.
Finally, the Board is proposing to remove all limitations that
appear in Sec. 703.103 in the current rule. The Board believes
Derivative limits are inconsistent with a principles-based approach,
especially when the activity is to manage IRR. The current rule has
limits on the weighted average remaining maturity notional and fair
value loss limits, both of which would be removed by the current
proposal.
In the current rule, FCUs are subject to two types of limits: A
fair value loss limit and a weighted average remaining maturity
notional (WARMN) limit. The fair value loss limit put a cap on the
unrealized losses an FCU could have associated with its Derivative
holdings. The WARMN limit is based on the notional amounts of
Derivatives held by an FCU adjusted for the maturity of the
transactions. Using notional with maturity captures price risk better
compared to only using notional.
These limits were designed to limit an FCU's Derivative unrealized
losses and the price risk of an FCU's Derivative positions. The limits
were either entry limits or standard limits. The entry limit was the
lower of the two limits and was for an FCU that had been engaging in
Derivative transactions for less than a year. The entry limit in the
current rule caps the fair value loss at 15 percent of Net Worth and
caps the WARMN at 65 percent of Net Worth. The intent of this limit was
to ensure an FCU did not take a large amount of Derivative exposure
without offering the NCUA an opportunity to examine the activity.
The standard limit is higher than the entry limit, and allowed FCUs
to take more Derivative exposure after a year's worth of Derivative
activity. The standard limit in the current rule caps the fair value
loss at 25 percent of Net Worth and caps the WARMN at 100 percent of
Net Worth.
Based on the supervisory experience from the past six years, the
Board has determined that the limits from the current Derivative rule
do not offer the safety and soundness protections they were intended to
provide. First, the Board has found that FCUs do not generally approach
the limits in the current Derivative rule. Moreover, in cases where an
FCU did approach the limit, the Board found that additional Derivative
exposure would not have created a safety and soundness concern for the
NCUA. The Board also believes removing the burden of measuring and
reporting the limits in the current rule outweighs the potential
benefit of having limits. The Board would like to note that the NCUA
will still review Derivative exposure when examining an FCU's
Derivative program and may determine that excessive exposures may be a
safety and soundness finding, subject to the various administrative
remedies permissible under the Federal Credit Union Act.
Section 703.104 Requirements for Counterparty Agreements, Collateral
and Margining
The Board is proposing to revise the requirements for counterparty
agreements, collateral and margining. The Board is proposing to require
FCUs to:
Have an executed Master Services Agreement with a Domestic
Counterparty that must be reviewed by counsel with expertise in similar
types of transactions to ensure it reasonably protects the FCU's
interests;
Use contracted Margin requirements with a maximum Margin
threshold amount of $250,000; and
Accept as collateral, for Margin requirements, only the
following:
[cir] Cash (U.S. dollars);
[cir] U.S. Treasuries;
[cir] Government-sponsored enterprise debt;
[cir] U.S. government agency debt;
[cir] Government-sponsored enterprise residential mortgage-backed
security pass-through securities; and
[cir] U.S. government agency residential mortgage-backed security
pass-through securities.
These requirements are generally consistent with the requirements
in Sec. 703.104(a) in the current rule,\17\ with a few exceptions. The
current rule breaks down permissible counterparties and requirements
for exchange-traded and cleared Derivative transactions and for non-
cleared Derivative transactions. In exchange-traded and cleared
Derivative transactions there is a clearinghouse between the two
counterparties. The Dodd-Frank Act requires a clearinghouse for these
types of Derivative transactions.\18\ Non-cleared Derivative
transactions are those that take place between two parties without
involving a clearinghouse. Federal credit unions are exempt from
mandatory use of a clearinghouse due to the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (CFTC) exemption for cooperatives.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 12 CFR 703.104(a).
\18\ Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act,
Public Law 111-203, 723, 124 Stat., July 21, 2010.
\19\ 17 CFR 50.51.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For simplification, the Board is proposing to create one standard
for both exchange-traded and cleared Derivative transactions, and for
non-cleared Derivative transactions. In the
[[Page 68493]]
proposed standard, the Board requires an FCU to enter a Master Services
Agreement with a Domestic Counterparty before engaging in Derivative
transactions under this proposal. A Master Service Agreement is the
contract that dictates the terms of the Derivative contract.
The current rule does not dictate that exchange-traded and cleared
Derivative transactions are required to have a Master Service
Agreement, but the Board believes it is standard practice for exchange-
traded and cleared Derivative transactions to document standard terms
that apply to all transactions entered into between two parties. The
Board believes the proposed Domestic Counterparty requirement is
consistent with the current rule that requires CFTC registrants for
exchange-traded Derivatives and registered swap dealers for non-cleared
Derivatives. The Board also believes the requirement of having a Master
Services Agreement is consistent with the current rule and reflects
standard industry practice.
The Board is also proposing to require that the Master Services
Agreement be reviewed by counsel that has expertise with similar types
of transactions to ensure the agreement reasonably protects an FCU's
interests. This is a clarifying change compared to the current rule,
but is not a new requirement. The current rule requires the legal
review be performed by counsel that has legal expertise with Derivative
contracts and related matters. The proposal will only require the
Master Services Agreement be reviewed by counsel that has expertise
with similar types of transactions to ensure the agreement reasonably
protects an FCU's interest. The Board believes that complex loan or
securities documents meet the standard for similar types of
transactions.
The Board is proposing a contracted Margin requirement with a
maximum Margin threshold amount of $250,000 for both exchange-traded
and cleared, and non-cleared Derivative transactions. Margin helps
protect counterparties from the credit risk of a counterparty by
requiring the counterparty to post collateral if they are in a net loss
position. The permissible type of collateral for FCUs is discussed
later in this document. The maximum Margin threshold is the maximum
amount a party in the Derivative transaction can be undercollaterized.
The Board did not specify a maximum Margin threshold for exchange-
traded and cleared Derivatives in the current rule, but did specify the
same threshold for non-cleared Derivatives, which is the same as in
this proposed rule. The Board believes the maximum Margin threshold in
the proposal for exchange-traded and cleared Derivatives is consistent
with clearing houses for exchange-traded and cleared Derivatives.
The Board is proposing to revise the existing eligible collateral
requirements in two ways.\20\ First, the Board is proposing to add a
requirement that exchange-traded and cleared Derivatives be subject to
the collateral requirements. The current rule does not specify
collateral types for exchange-traded and cleared Derivatives. The Board
believes the eligible collateral requirements are generally consistent
with the collateral requirement for the clearing houses for exchange-
traded Derivatives. The Board is seeking specific comment on whether
specifying acceptable collateral for exchange-traded and cleared
Derivatives may create unintended consequences for FCUs. If so, the
Board is seeking comment on what the unintended consequences may be,
and how the NCUA should modify the proposal. For example, should the
NCUA revert to not having collateral standards for exchange-traded and
cleared Derivatives as in the current rule?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Eligible collateral is used to satisfy the Margin
requirements for FCUs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second change from the current rule is that the Board is
proposing to add U.S. government agency residential mortgage backed
pass-through securities (for example, Government National Mortgage
Association (GNMA) pass-through securities) as an acceptable collateral
type. GNMA pass-through securities are guaranteed by the U.S.
government and are highly liquid. Not including this collateral type
was an oversight from the current rule, which the Board is proposing to
remedy with this amendment. The proposal continues to restrict the
forms of collateral to the most liquid and easily valued instruments so
they can be easily negotiated even in times of market illiquidity.
Section 703.105 Reporting Requirements
The Board is proposing to retain certain parts of the reporting
requirements in the current Derivatives rule. The current rule requires
that FCUs provide their board of directors, senior executive officers,
and, if applicable, asset liability committee a comprehensive
Derivatives report.
Specifically, the Board is retaining the required frequency of
reporting (at least quarterly to the FCU's board of directors, and at
least monthly to the FCU's senior executive officer and applicable
asset liability committee). The Board is also retaining the
requirements outlining what must be included in these reports. This
includes identification of any areas of noncompliance with any
provision of this rule or the FCU's policies; an itemization of the
FCU's individual transactions subject to the rule; the current values
of such transactions; each individual transaction's intended use for
IRR mitigation; and a comprehensive view of the FCU's risk reports,
including, but not limited to, IRR calculations with details of the
transactions subject to the rule.
The Board has also consolidated and streamlined the current rule's
reporting requirements in this proposal in Sec. 703.105(c)(3) to
include the relative risk reports and intended use of Derivatives for
IRR management. The Board is also proposing to eliminate the reporting
of compliance with regulatory limits, which aligns with this proposal's
elimination of the regulatory limits
The Board believes that retaining these reporting requirements is
essential to FCUs maintaining strong internal controls related to
Derivative transactions, given the principles-based approach of this
proposed rule. The Board also believes that the proposed reporting
requirements are less burdensome to FCUs, while ensuring the proper
credit union officials receive reports that are necessary to oversee a
credit union's Derivatives program.
In conjunction with the regulatory violation requirements of
proposed Sec. 703.109, discussed later in this document, the Board is
proposing to require that an FCU submit the Derivatives management
report to the applicable Regional Director \21\ when there has been a
regulatory violation or violation of the FCU's policies. This is not a
new reporting requirement; the current rule requires an FCU to submit a
description of the violation and the corrective action within three
business days of a violation.\22\ The Board is proposing to allow an
FCU to submit the Derivatives management report to its board of
directors before submitting such report to the applicable Regional
Director. The Board notes that an FCU is required to submit the
Derivatives management report to the applicable Regional Director when
there has been a violation of the regulation or the FCU's policies. The
Board has also added a requirement that the
[[Page 68494]]
Derivatives report be made available to NCUA examiners upon request.
The Board notes that this is not a new burden, but merely a transparent
codification of exisiting authority, which will provide NCUA examiners
the documents to support the compliance with the requirements of this
subpart.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Regional Director is a defined term in the Derivatives
rule, which means the applicable NCUA Regional Director or the
Director of the Office of National Examinations and Supervision.
\22\ 12 CFR 703.114(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Board is proposing to add the requirement that FCUs retain
reports to the Board and Senior Executive Officers in accordance with
the Record Retention Guidelines set forth in Appendix A to part
749.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Id. at Appendix A to part 749.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 703.106(a) Operational Support Requirements; Required
Experience and Competencies
The Board believes that a credit union's board of directors and
senior executive officers need sufficient experience and knowledge to
effectively oversee a Derivatives program. Therefore, the Board is
proposing to retain many of the experience and competency requirements
from the current rule \24\ in this proposal. First, the Board is
proposing to retain the requirement that an FCU's board of directors
receive training before an FCU engages in its first Derivative
transaction. Any new board of director subsequent to the initial
training of the board of directors must receive Derivatives training.
Such training must provide board members a general understanding of
Derivative transactions and the knowledge required to provide strategic
oversight of the FCU's Derivatives program. The Board, however, is
proposing to remove the requirement, in the current Derivatives rule,
that an FCU's board members receive annual Dervivatives training. As
discussed further in the next paragraph, the Board is substituting the
required annual training with an annual briefing from the FCU's Senior
Executive Officers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Id. at Sec. 703.106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Board considers the transparency of the Derivatives program
with the board of directors to be a critical part of the FCU's internal
controls and communication. As such the Board is replacing the
requirement in the current rule that requires annual training after the
initial training with a requirement that the board be briefed, at least
annually, on the Derivatives program using the required reporting to
the board as prescribed in Sec. 703.105(a) of this subpart.
In addition to the annual training, the Board believes that the
required reporting requirements to the board of directors (proposed
Sec. 703.105 of this subpart) will provide the necessary transparency
and disclosure of such activities on an ongoing basis. .
The Board is proposing to retain the requirement that an FCU's
senior executive officers must be able to understand, approve, and
provide oversight for a Derivatives program. Senior executive officers
must have a comprehensive understanding of how Derivatives fit into the
credit union's risk management process.
The Board believes that an FCU must have qualified personnel to
manage the asset/liability risk management functions when a Derivatives
program is in place. Personnel must have enhanced capabilities to
estimate the credit union's Earnings at Risk and Net Economic Value
based on the market's expectation of future interest rates and any
potential changes from those expectations. The Board is retaining the
staff qualifications from the current rule to support the complexity of
Derivatives for trade execution, financial reporting, accounting, and
the operational processes related to Margin requirements.
Section 703.106(b) Operational Support Requirements; Required Review
and Internal Controls Structure
The Board is proposing to retain the current requirements for
transaction review and internal controls.\25\ For transaction reviews,
the Board is retaining the requirement that an FCU identify and
document the circumstances that lead to the decision to execute a
transaction, specify the strategy the credit union will employ, and
demonstrate the economic effectiveness of the transaction. The Board is
retaining the requirement for transaction reviews because such reviews
are critical to an FCU and the NCUA understanding how Derivatives are
being used to manage IRR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Id. at 703.106(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For internal controls reviews, the Board is proposing to reduce the
number of required internal controls reviews an FCU must conduct. The
current rule requires internal controls reviews for the first two years
from when an FCU commenced its Derivatives program.\26\ The Board is
proposing to reduce this to only the first year after an FCU engages in
its first Derivative transaction. The Board believes that retaining at
least one internal controls review, along with the required reporting
and operational provisions in this proposal, is prudent in supporting a
safe and sound Derivatives program. However, credit unions should
continue to review and strengthen controls accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Board believes the internal controls review should be a
comprehensive review of all aspects of an FCU's Derivatives functions,
with timely identification and resolution of all findings. The Board is
retaining the other provisions of the current rule associated with
internal controls reviews including that an internal controls reviews
must be conducted by an independent external unit or, if applicable,
the FCU's internal auditor. The Board believes that an independent unit
would be objective to the business processes in supporting Derivatives.
The Board is retaining the current rule's requirement that any FCU
engaging in Derivatives transactions pursuant to this subpart must
obtain an annual financial statement audit, as defined in Sec.
715.2(d), in supporting that all transactions are accurately accounted
for in accordance with GAAP.
The Board is also proposing to remove the specific provision from
the current rule (Sec. 703.106(b)(4)) for the process and
responsibility framework as credit unions have generally included these
items as part of their policies and procedures. The Board believes
that, irrespective of a specific requirement, FCUs entering into
Derivatives would continue to include the necessary information in
their policies and procedures.
The Board is proposing to retain the requirement for separation of
duties in the current rule to further support the prudent risk
management and internal controls in supporting a Derivatives program.
The Board believes adequate separation of duties is nessecary to
effectuate a Derivatives program in a safe and sound manner by
eliminating the propensity for insider fraud and abuse.
The Board is proposing to add a requirement for a liquidity review
as part of the operational support requirements, given the importance
of asset/liability management and the potential liquidity pressures
associated with Margin requirements with a Derivative counterparty and
having the eligible collateral as a potential use for Margin
requirements. In addition, the liquidity review must also address how
an FCU is planning on responding to potential changes in interest
rates, which may require significant and unpredictable Margin
requirements from the Derivative counterparty that must be settled on a
daily basis over and above the Margin threshold.
The Board is retaining the requirements of policies and procedures
[[Page 68495]]
in that the policies must address the requirements of this subpart and
any additional limitations imposed by the FCU's board of directors. The
Board is retaining the requirement that a review of the policies and
procedures must be completed annually by the board of directors. The
Board believes that effective policies and procedures which are
reviewed annually are critical to maintaining and supporting a
Derivatives program.
Section 703.107 External Service Providers
The Board is proposing some changes to FCU's use of External
Service Providers (ESPs) from the current rule. The general
requirements in this proposal address restrictions on ESPs, an FCU's
ability to oversee and manage ESPs, and an FCU's documentation of the
specific uses of ESPs.
As with the current Derivative rule, the Board is proposing to
allow ESPs, provided the ESP (including its affiliates) does not:
Act as a counterparty to any Derivatives transactions that
involve the FCU;
Act as a principal or agent in any Derivatives
transactions that involve the FCU; or
Have discretionary authority to execute any of the FCU's
Derivatives transactions.
The above prohibitions on ESPs are identical to the prohibitions in
the current rule. The Board continues to believe there would be an
inherent conflict of interest if an ESP (including its affiliates)
acted as a counterparty or principle/agent for a Derivative
transaction. Therefore, the Board is proposing to retain this
prohibition.
The Board is also proposing to retain the prohibition of an ESP
having discretionary authority to execute any of an FCU's Derivative
transactions. Allowing discretionary authority for an ESP would remove
a level of control from an FCU, which is inconsistent with an FCU's
operational support requirements.
The Board also is proposing to retain the current requirements in
the Derivatives rule that an FCU must have the internal capacity,
experience, and skills to oversee and manage any ESP it uses. This
requirement is consistent with an FCU's duties required in the
operational support requirements and safety and soundness.
The Board is proposing a slight modification in how FCUs will be
required to document specific uses of ESPs. The Board is proposing to
remove the reference to its ``process and responsibilities framework''
from the current rule, because the Board is proposing to no longer
require the framework in this proposal.
The Board is proposing to replace the process and responsibilities
framework requirement with the documentation being required in its
policies and procedures. The Board believes this proposed change offers
FCUs a clearer understanding of the NCUA's requirements, because FCUs
are more familiar with policies and procedures than process and
responsibilities frameworks, which may be considered nebulous. The
process and responsibilities framework is unique to the current
Derivative rule; policies and procedures are either required or
expected for many FCU activities outside of Derivatives.
The Board is also proposing to clarify that an FCU's use of ESPs
does not alleviate the credit union of its responsibility to employ
qualified personnel in accordance with the operational support
requirements of the proposed rule. The Board believes this requirement
is consistent with the current rule and the proposed operation support
requirements in Sec. 703.106, and also believes such clarification is
necessary due to the proposed removal of an application process in the
proposed Sec. 703.108 for some FCUs.
Lastly, the Board is proposing to remove the support functions
paragraph in the current rule. The support functions paragraph in the
current rule requires an FCU to perform asset/liability management and
liquidity risk management internally and independently. The Board
believes this paragraph is not necessary for two reasons. First, the
proposed operational support requirements section in the proposed Sec.
703.106 already contains an FCU's requirements for asset/liability
management and liquidity risk management. Second, the Board believes
the current requirement created confusion in cases where an FCU had
oversight and control of both functions and was using models housed at
the ESP to perform these functions.
The Board believes removing this requirement will make it clear
that an FCU may house asset/liability management and liquidity risk
management at an ESP if the credit union has oversight and control of
both functions. The Board believes the proposed changes remain
consistent with the intent of the current rule, albeit less
prescriptive.
Section 703.108 Notification and Application Requirements
The Board is proposing to eliminate the application process for
FCUs with at least $500 million in assets and that have a CAMEL
Management component rating of 1 or 2. However, the Board is proposing
that an FCU provide the applicable Regional Director a written
notification within five business days after entering into its first
Derivative transaction.
In determining the proposed dollar threshold of $500 million, the
Board takes the position that FCUs that will be subject to the NCUA's
risk-based capital (RBC) requirements and will be deemed ``complex''
generally have the required infrastructure to enter into Derivative
transactions without preapproval. The Board also contemplated
thresholds higher and lower than $500 million, but believes the
threshold of $500 million is appropriate due to FCU's this size
generally having the required infrastructure to enter into Derivative
transactions. The Board is specifically requesting comment on whether
the dollar threshold for the new notification provision in the proposal
should be increased or decreased, and why such increase or decrease is
warranted. For example, should the Board change the dollar threshold to
$250 million or $1 billion? Furthermore, as an added safeguard beyond
the ``at least $500 million in assets'' criteria, the Board is
proposing to only allow FCUs that have a CAMEL Management component
rating of 1or 2 to be exempt from the application process.
The Board believes a CAMEL Management component rating of 1 or 2
demonstrates FCUs with at least $500 million in assets have at least
satisfactory management and board practices relative to the FCU's size
and, in general, have effectively identified, measured, monitored, and
controlled risks at the FCU. However, the Board is proposing to require
FCUs with more than $500 million in assets and a CAMEL Management
component rating of 1 or 2 to provide written notification to the
appropriate Regional Director within five business days after entering
into their first Derivative transaction to ensure the NCUA is aware of
their activity. This will provide the NCUA the opportunity to schedule
a supervision contact or an examination if it is deemed necessary.
The Board is proposing that an FCU that does not meet the
notification criteria (those with less than $500 million in assets and/
or a CAMEL Management component rating of 3, 4, or 5) submit an
application to the applicable Regional Director for Derivatives
authority that contains content generally consistent with the
[[Page 68496]]
current rule.\27\ Requiring such content will ensure that such an FCU
can demonstrate the requisite systems and expertise to support
Derivatives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 12 CFR 703.110.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Board is proposing three non-technical changes to the
application content in the current rule. First, instead of requiring an
FCU to provide a list of Derivatives products and product
characteristics it is applying for authority to use, the Board is
proposing requiring the FCU to provide a list of products and
characteristics it intends to use. This change is necessitated by the
Board moving towards a principles-based approach on products and
characteristics.
Second, the Board is proposing to remove the requirement for an FCU
to provide ``a description of how it intends to use the products and
characteristics listed, an analysis of how the products and
characteristics fit within its interest rate risk mitigation plan, and
a justification for each product and characteristic listed.'' \28\ The
Board believes this requirement is too prescriptive and creates an
unnecessary burden on FCUs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Id. at Sec. 703.110(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Board is proposing the addition of a provision that
the Regional Director may request additional information as part of an
FCU's application for Derivatives authority. The Board believes the
Regional Director has always had this authority, but believes adding it
to the rule provides clarity.
The NCUA plans to modify its current application guidance to be
consistent with any new final Derivative rule. The Board would like to
note that the proposed rule no longer has a provision to apply for
interim approval. The Board believes the interim approval provision in
the current rule provided no benefits for FCUs and, conversely,
increased burden on both FCUs and the NCUA.
In this proposal, the Board included an application review
paragraph for FCUs subject to application requirements. The application
review paragraph is consistent with the current rule's approval
section, but does not address interim approval. The Board is proposing
to only allow final approvals for Derivative applications. The Board
has retained the right for an FCU to appeal the denial of a Derivative
application, consistent with the current rule.
The Board also is proposing a change in the condition paragraph
that requires FCUs to immediately cease entering into any new
Derivatives and contact the applicable Regional Director if the FCU
experiences a change in condition such that it no longer meets the
requirements for a notification FCU or if an FCU's application becomes
materially inaccurate.
For example, an FCU that engaged in Derivatives after notifying its
applicable Regional Director (required after entering into the first
Derivative transaction) and is subsequently downgraded to a CAMEL
Management component rating of 3 must immediately stop entering into
new Derivatives and contact the applicable Regional Director regarding
the change of condition. In this example, an FCU could subsequently
apply for Derivative authority under the application process.
Another example would be if an FCU's asset size drops below $500
million. As with the previous example, the FCU must immediately stop
entering into new Derivatives and contact the applicable Regional
Director regarding the change of condition. The FCU can subsequently
apply for Derivative authority under the application process.
An FCU must also notify the applicable Regional Director if it
determines its approved application is inaccurate. An application would
be rendered inaccurate if an FCU no longer meets the operational
support requirements in the proposed Sec. 703.106. These requirements
are focused on an FCU's management capabilities and the FCU's required
reviews. For example, if an FCU no longer has qualified Derivative
personnel required by the proposed rule, it would be required to
immediately stop entering into new Derivatives and contact the
applicable Regional Director regarding the change of condition. The
proposed rule would not require an FCU to notify the applicable
Regional Director on the basis of staff turnover if the FCU still meets
the qualified personnel in the operational support requirements
section.
Section 703.109 Regulatory Violation or Unsafe and Unsound Condition
The Board is retaining the provisions of the current rule for
regulatory violations when an FCU no longer meets the requirements of
this subpart or its internal polices, in that such an FCU must
immediately stop entering into any new Derivative transactions.
However, the determination of the regulatory violation will be made by
the applicable Regional Director, who will provide written notice to
the credit union.
The Board is proposing changes for Regulatory violations to include
when an FCU is operating in an unsafe or unsound condition and
establish that the applicable Regional Director will determine whether
a regulatory violation has occurred. If the applicable Regional
Director determines that the credit union is operating in an unsafe or
unsound condition the applicable Regional Director may prohibit an FCU
from engaging in Derivatives transactions. If the applicable Regional
Director renders such a determination, he or she will provide the FCU
written notice that includes the reason for such determination.
The Board believes the principles-based approach of the proposed
rule creates greater responsibility on an FCU's senior executive
officers, who are responsible for ensuring that the Derivative program
is properly and safely addressed in the credit union's internal
controls, policies, and procedures.
D. Other Affected Parts
In addition to the aforementioned changes, the Board is also
proposing to amend parts 741 and 746.
Section 741.219 Investment requirements [Amended]
The Board is proposing to maintain the notification requirement for
FISCUs. However, the proposal adjusts the timeframe for a FISCU to
notify the NCUA of its Derivatives activity. The 2014 final rule
required a FISCU to notify the NCUA at least 30 days before it begins
engaging in Derivatives. The Board is proposing to amend this to
require a FISCU to notify the NCUA within five business days after
entering into its first Derivatives transaction.
The Board believes that adjusting the notification to occur after a
FISCU enters into its first Derivatives transaction will provide the
applicable Regional Director more certainty for planning examiner time
and specialists resources. The Board is proposing that this
notification will not be required for transactions covered under Sec.
703.14 for loan pipeline management.
This amendment would align this section with the notice provisions
discussed elsewhere in this document (Sec. 703.108--Notification and
application requirements) by removing the 30-day time requirement. The
Board is proposing this change to ensure consistency between FCUs and
FISCUs that engage in Derivatives and notifications to NCUA related
thereto.
The Board is also proposing to amend Sec. 746. 201 to correct a
citation that would change based on the proposed change to Subpart B to
part 703. The Board notes that this change is strictly technical, and
will not affect the substance of this section of part 746.
[[Page 68497]]
IV. Regulatory Procedures
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
(defined for purposes of the RFA to include credit unions with assets
less than $100 million).\29\ 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
and publishes its certification and a short, explanatory statement in
the Federal Register together with the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See NCUA Interpretive Ruling and Policy Statement 87-2, as
amended by IRPS 03-2 and IRPS 15-1, 80 FR 57512 (Sept. 24, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule would amend the NCUA's Derivatives rule to shift
from a prescriptive construct to a principles-based approach. As a
result, it would not cause any increased burden or impose any new
requirements on FICUs. Accordingly, the NCUA certifies that the
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small credit unions.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) applies to information
collection requirements in which an agency creates a new paperwork
burden on regulated entities or modifies an existing burden. For
purposes of the PRA, a paperwork burden may take the form of a
reporting, recordkeeping, or third-party disclosure requirement, each
referred to as an information collection. The NCUA may not conduct or
sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an
information collection unless it displays a currently valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
The NCUA anticipates more FCUs to engage in Derivatives, which
would increase the recordkeeping requirement associated with reports
made to the FCU board and senior executive officers under Sec.
703.105. This would increase the number of respondents from 20 to 50.
The proposed rule would also increase the number of FCUs that would be
required to maintain the policies and procedures annually under Sec.
703.106(c) from 43 to 50 respondents. These policies and procedures
would also include the process and responsibility framework
requirements of external service providers, eliminating separate
recordkeeping requirement of Sec. 703.107(a)(3). Section 703.108(a)
provides for FCUs the meet certain requirements to provide notification
of its readiness to engage in derivatives in lieu of an application. An
increase is estimated in the number of FCUs that would engage in
Derivatives from 4 to 15. The NCUA does not anticipate any increase in
the number of FCUs currently providing applications under proposed
Sec. 703.108(b) annually. Information collection requirements
previously identified under Sec. Sec. 703.112 through 703.114 are
being removed due to obsolete reporting. Burden under these sections
had previously been reported as zero hours. It is estimated that
program changes to the information collection requirements associated
with this proposed rule increase the burden by 254 hours.
Adjustments to the information collection burden are also being
made to include information collection requirements not previously
captured and to update respondents and response times to reflect a more
accurate and up-to-date accounting of the burden. Adjustments to the
information collection requirements will increase the burden by 290
hours.
The proposed rule would revise the information collection
requirements currently approved under OMB number 3133-0133, as follows:
Title of Information Collection: Investment and Deposit Activities,
12 CFR Part 703.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 50.
Estimated Annual Responses per Respondent: 23.86.
Estimated Total Annual Responses: 1,193.
Estimated Hours per Response: 0.70.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 839.
Affected Public: Private Section: Not-for-profit institutions.
The NCUA invites comments on: (a) Whether the collection of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the agencies'
functions, including whether the information has practical utility; (b)
the accuracy of the estimates of the burden of information, including
the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the information
collection on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e)
estimates of capital or start-up costs and cost of operations,
maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.
All comments are a matter of public record. Due to the limited in-
house staff, email comments are preferred. Comments regarding the
information collection requirements of this rule should be (1) mailed
to: [email protected] with ``OMB No. 3133-0133'' in the subject
line; faxed to (703) 837-2406, or mailed to Dawn Wolfgang, NCUA PRA
Clearance Officer, National Credit Union Administration, 1775 Duke
Street, Suite 6032, Alexandria, VA 22314, and to the (2) Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, at
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Select ``Currently under 30-day
Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.
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, the NCUA, an
independent regulatory agency as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5),
voluntarily complies with the principles of 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. The NCUA has determined that this proposed rule does not
constitute a policy that has federalism implications for purposes of
the executive order.
Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families
The NCUA has determined that this proposed rule will not affect
family well-being within the meaning of section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act, 1999, Public Law 105-277, 112
Stat. 2681 (1998).
List of Subjects
12 CFR Part 701
Advertising, Aged, Civil rights, Credit, Credit unions, Fair
housing, Individuals with disabilities, Insurance, Marital status
discrimination, Mortgages, Religious discrimination, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sex discrimination, Signs and symbols,
Surety bonds.
12 CFR Part 703
Credit unions, Investments, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
[[Page 68498]]
12 CFR Part 741
Bank deposit insurance, Credit unions, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
12 CFR Part 746
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Credit unions,
Investigations.
By the National Credit Union Administration Board on October 15,
2020.
Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks,
Secretary of the Board.
For the reasons discussed above, the Board is proposing to amend 12
CFR parts 701, 703, 741, and 746 as follows:
PART 701--ORGANIZATION AND OPERATION OF FEDERAL CREDIT UNIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 701 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1752(5), 1755, 1756, 1757, 1758, 1759,
1761a, 1761b, 1766, 1767, 1782, 1784, 1786, 1787, 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.
Sec. 701.21 [Amended]
0
2. Amend Sec. 701.21 by removing paragraph (i).
PART 703--INVESTMENT AND DEPOSIT ACTIVITIES
0
3. The authority citation for part 703 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1757(7), 1757(8), 1757(15).
Sec. 703.2 [Amended]
0
4. Amend Sec. 703.2 by removing the definition ``Derivative.''
0
5. Amend Sec. 703.14 by revising paragraph (k) and adding paragraph
(l) to read as follows:
Sec. 703.14 Permissible investments.
* * * * *
(k) Loan pipeline management. A Federal credit union may enter into
the following transactions related to the management of its loan
pipeline:
(1) Interest rate lock commitments and forward sales commitments;
and
(2) Transactions to manage interest rate exposure.
(l) Embedded options. A Federal credit union may enter into
embedded options not required under generally accepted accounting
principles (GAAP) adopted in the United States to be accounted for
separately from the host contract. Embedded options that are required,
under GAAP, to be accounted for separately from the host contract are
addressed in Sec. 703.103(c) of this part.
0
6. Revise Subpart B to part 703 to read as follows:
Subpart B--Derivatives Authority
Sec.
703.101 Purpose and scope.
703.102 Definitions.
703.103 Requirements related to the characteristics of permissible
interest rate risk Derivatives.
703.104 Requirements for counterparty agreements, collateral and
Margining.
703.105 Reporting requirements.
703.106 Operational support requirements.
703.107 External service providers.
703.108 Notification and application requirements.
703.109 Regulatory violation or unsafe and unsound condition.
Sec. 703.101 Purpose and scope.
(a) Purpose. This subpart grants Federal credit unions limited
authority to enter into Derivatives only for the purpose of managing
Interest Rate Risk.
(b) Scope. This subpart applies to all Federal credit unions.
Except as provided in Sec. 741.219, this rule does not apply to
federally insured, state-chartered credit unions.
(c) Prior Approvals. Any Federal credit union with an active
approval, under the prior version of this subpart, on [EFFECTIVE DATE
OF FINAL RULE] is subject to the provisions of this subpart and is no
longer subject to the restrictions, limits, or terms contained in the
Federal credit union's approved application.
(d) Pending Approvals. Any application for Derivatives authority
pending on [EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE], except for such applications
submitted by a Federal credit union that would be subject to the
requirements of Sec. 703.108(b) of this subpart, is deemed to be
withdrawn and such applicant is subject to the provisions of this
subpart.
Sec. 703.102 Definitions.
For purposes of this subpart:
Counterparty means a swap dealer (as defined by the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission in 17 CFR 1.3), Derivatives clearing
organization (as defined by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in
17 CFR 1.3), or central financial clearing market (exchange) that
participates as the other party in a Derivatives transaction with a
Federal credit union;
Domestic Counterparty means a counterparty domiciled in the United
States;
Domestic Interest Rates means interest rates derived in the United
States and are U.S. dollar denominated;
Derivative means a financial contract that derives its value from
the value and performance of some other underlying financial instrument
or variable, such as an index or interest rate;
Earnings at Risk means the changes to earnings, typically in the
short term (for example, 12 to 36 months), caused by changes in
interest rates;
Economic Effectiveness means the extent to which a Derivatives
transaction results in offsetting changes in the Interest Rate Risk
that the transaction was, and is, intended to provide;
External Service Provider means any entity that provides services
to assist a Federal credit union in carrying out its Derivatives
program and the requirements of this subpart;
Interest Rate Cap means a contract, based on a reference interest
rate, for payment to the purchaser when the reference interest rate
rises above the level specified in the contract;
Interest Rate Floor means a contract, based on a reference interest
rate, for payment to the purchaser when the reference interest rate
falls below the level specified in the contract;
Interest Rate Risk means the current and prospective risk to a
credit union's capital and earnings arising from movements in interest
rates.
Margin means the minimum amount of eligible collateral, as defined
in Sec. 703.104(c), that must be deposited between parties to a
Derivatives transaction, as detailed in a Master Services Agreement;
Master Services Agreement means a document agreed upon between two
parties that sets out standard terms that apply to all transactions
entered into between those parties. The most common form of a Master
Services Agreement for Derivatives is an International Swap Dealer
Association (ISDA) Master Agreement
Net Economic Value means the measurement of changes in the economic
value of Net Worth caused by changes in interest rates;
Net Worth has the meaning specified in part 702 of this chapter;
Novation means the substitution of an old obligation with a new one
that either replaces an existing obligation with a new obligation or
replaces an original party with a new party;
Reference Interest Rate means the index or rate to be used as the
variable rate for resetting Derivatives transactions;
Regional Director means an NCUA Regional Director or the Director
of the Office of National Examinations and Supervision;
[[Page 68499]]
Senior Executive Officer has the meaning specified in Sec. 701.14
of this chapter and any other similar employee that is directly within
the chain of command for the oversight of a Federal credit union's
Derivatives program;
Structured Liability Offering means a share product created by a
Federal credit union with contractual option features, such as periodic
caps and calls, similar to those found in structured securities or
structured notes;
Threshold Amount means an unsecured credit exposure that a party to
a Derivatives transaction is prepared to accept before requesting
additional eligible collateral, as defined in Sec. 703.104(c), from
the other party;
Trade Date means the date that a Derivatives order (new
transactions, terminations, or assignments) is executed with a
counterparty; and
Written Options means an option where compensation has been
received and the Domestic Counterparty has the right, not obligation,
to exercise the option on a future date(s).
Sec. 703.103 Requirements related to the characteristics of
permissible interest rate risk Derivatives.
(a) A Federal credit union may only enter into Derivatives, under
this subpart that have the following characteristics:
(1) Denominated in U.S. dollars;
(2) Based on Domestic Interest Rates or the U.S. dollar-denominated
London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR);
(3) A contract maturity equal to or less than 15 years, as of the
Trade Date; and
(4) Not used to create Structured Liability Offerings for members
or nonmembers.
(b) A Federal credit union may not engage in Written Options.
Examples of Written Options include swaptions, interest rate caps and
interest rate floors.
(c) A Federal credit union may not engage in embedded options
required under U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) to
be accounted for separately from the host contract.
Sec. 703.104 Requirements for counterparty agreements, collateral
and Margining.
To enter into Derivatives transactions under this subpart, a
Federal credit union must:
(a) Have an executed Master Services Agreement with a Domestic
Counterparty. Such agreement must be reviewed by counsel with expertise
in similar types of transactions to ensure the agreement reasonably
protects the interests of the Federal credit union;
(b) Utilize contracted Margin requirements with a maximum Margin
threshold amount of $250,000; and
(c) Accept as eligible collateral, for Margin requirements, only
the following: Cash (U.S. dollars), U.S. Treasuries, government-
sponsored enterprise debt, U.S. government agency debt, government-
sponsored enterprise residential mortgage-backed security pass-through
securities, and U.S. government agency residential mortgage-backed
security pass-through securities.
Sec. 703.105 Reporting requirements.
(a) Board reporting. At least quarterly, a Federal credit union's
Senior Executive Officers must deliver a comprehensive Derivatives
report, as described in paragraph (c) of this section to the Federal
credit union's board of directors.
(b) Senior Executive Officer and asset liability or similarly
functioning committee. At least monthly, Federal credit union staff
must deliver a comprehensive Derivatives report, as described in
paragraph (c) of this section to the Federal credit union's Senior
Executive Officers and, if applicable, the Federal credit union's asset
liability or similarly functioning committee.
(c) Comprehensive Derivatives management report. At a minimum, the
reports required in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section must
include:
(1) Identification of any areas of noncompliance with any provision
of this subpart or the Federal credit union's policies, and the planned
remediation of such noncompliance;
(2) An itemization of the Federal credit union's individual
transactions subject to this subpart, the current values of such
transactions, and each individual transaction's intended use for
Interest Rate Risk mitigation;
(3) A comprehensive view of the Federal credit union's risk
reports, including, but not limited to, Interest Rate Risk calculations
with details of the transactions subject to this subpart.
(d) Reports required by this section must, at a minimum, be
retained in accordance with the requirements in Appendix A to part 749.
(e) Notification of any noncompliance as part of the Derivatives
management report required in paragraph (c)(1) of this section must be
submitted to the applicable Regional Director immediately after it has
been submitted to the Federal credit union's board of directors.
(f) The NCUA may, at any time, request the Derivatives management
report required by paragraph (c) of this section.
Sec. 703.106 Operational support requirements.
(a) Required experience and competencies. A Federal credit union
using Derivative transactions subject to this subpart must internally
possess the following experience and competencies:
(1) Board. (i) Before entering into the initial Derivatives
transaction, a Federal credit union's board members must receive
training that provides a general understanding of the Derivative
transactions, and the knowledge required to provide strategic oversight
of the Federal credit union's Derivatives program.
(ii) Any person that becomes a board member after the initial
Derivatives transaction must receive the same training as required by
paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section.
(iii) At least annually after the initial Derivatives transaction,
as part of the Derivatives reporting requirement in Sec. 703.105(a),
the Federal credit union's Senior Executive Officers must brief the
board on the Federal credit union's use of Derivatives to manage
Interest Rate Risk.
(2) Senior executive officers. A Federal credit union's Senior
Executive Officers must be able to understand, approve, and provide
oversight for the Derivatives program. These individuals must have a
comprehensive understanding of how the Derivative transactions fit into
the Federal credit union's Interest Rate Risk management process.
(3) Qualified Derivatives personnel. To engage in the Derivative
transactions, a Federal credit union must employ staff with experience
in the following areas:
(i) Asset/liability risk management. Staff must be qualified to
understand and oversee asset/liability risk management, including the
appropriate role of the transactions subject to this subpart. Staff
must also be qualified to understand and undertake or oversee the
appropriate modeling and analytics related to Net Economic Value and
Earnings at Risk;
(ii) Accounting and financial reporting. Staff must be qualified to
understand and oversee appropriate accounting and financial reporting
for Derivatives in accordance GAAP;
(iii) Derivatives execution and oversight. Staff must be qualified
to undertake or oversee Derivative trade executions; and
(iv) Counterparty, collateral, and Margin management. Staff must be
qualified to evaluate counterparty, collateral, and Margin risk as
described in Sec. 703.104 of this subpart.
(b) Required review and internal controls structure. To effectively
[[Page 68500]]
manage the transactions subject to this subpart, a Federal credit union
must assess the effectiveness of its management and internal controls
structure. At a minimum, the internal controls structure must include:
(1) Transaction review. Before executing any transaction, a Federal
credit union must identify and document the circumstances that lead to
the decision to execute a transaction, specify the strategy the Federal
credit union will employ, and demonstrate the economic effectiveness of
the transaction;
(2) Internal controls review. Within the first year after
commencing its first Derivatives transaction, a Federal credit union
must have an internal controls review that is focused on the
integration and introduction of the program, and ensure the timely
identification of weaknesses in internal controls, accounting, and all
operational and oversight processes. This review must be performed by
an independent external unit or, if applicable, the Federal credit
union's internal auditor;
(3) Financial statement audit. Any Federal credit union engaging in
Derivatives transactions pursuant to this subpart must obtain an annual
financial statement audit, as defined in Sec. 715.2(d) of this
chapter, and be compliant with GAAP for all Derivatives-related
accounting and reporting;
(4) Collateral management review. Before executing its first
Derivative transaction, a Federal credit union must establish a
collateral management process that monitors a Federal credit union's
collateral and Margining requirements and ensures that its transactions
are collateralized in accordance with the collateral requirements of
this subpart and a Federal credit union's Master Services Agreement
with its counterparty; and
(5) Liquidity review. Before executing its first Derivative
transaction, a Federal credit union must establish a liquidity review
process to analyze and measure potential liquidity needs related to its
Derivatives program and the additional collateral requirements due to
changes in interest rates. The Federal credit union must, as part of
its liquidity risk management, calculate and track contingent liquidity
needs in the event a transaction needs to be novated or terminated, and
must establish effective controls for liquidity exposures arising from
both market or product liquidity and instrument cash flows.
(6) Separation of duties. A Federal credit union's process, whether
conducted internally or by an external service provider, must have
appropriate separation of duties for the following functions defined in
subsection (a)(3) of this section:
(i) Asset/liability risk management;
(ii) Accounting and financial reporting;
(iii) Derivatives execution and oversight; and
(iv) Counterparty, collateral, and Margin management
(c) Policies and procedures. A Federal credit union using
Derivatives, permitted under this subpart, must operate according to
comprehensive written policies and procedures for control, measurement,
and management of Derivative transactions. At a minimum, the policies
and procedures must address the requirements of this subpart and any
additional limitations imposed by the Federal credit union's board of
directors. A Federal credit union's board of directors must review the
policies and procedures described in this section at least annually and
update them when necessary.
Sec. 703.107 External service providers.
(a) General. A Federal credit union using Derivatives may use
external service providers to support or conduct aspects of its
Derivative management program, provided:
(1) The external service provider, including affiliates, does not:
(i) Act as a counterparty to any Derivative transactions that
involve the Federal credit union;
(ii) Act as a principal or agent in any Derivative transactions
that involve the Federal credit union; or
(iii) Have discretionary authority to execute any of the Federal
credit union's Derivative transactions.
(2) The Federal credit union has the internal capacity, experience,
and skills to oversee and manage any external service providers it
uses; and
(3) The Federal credit union documents the specific uses of
external service providers in its policies and procedures, as described
in Sec. 703.106(c) of this subpart.
(b) This section does not alleviate the responsibility of the
Federal credit union to employ qualified staff in accordance with Sec.
703.106 of this subpart.
Sec. 703.108 Notification and application requirements.
(a) Notification. A Federal credit union that meets the following
requirements must notify the applicable Regional Director in writing
within five business days after entering into its first Derivatives
transaction:
(1) The Federal credit union's most recent NCUA Management
component is a rating of 1 or 2; and
(2) The Federal credit union has assets of at least $500 million as
of its most recent call report.
(b) Application. A Federal credit union that does not meet the
requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) and/or (2) of this section must
obtain approval before engaging in Derivatives under this subpart from
its applicable Regional Director, by submitting an application, that,
at a minimum, includes the following:
(1) An Interest Rate Risk mitigation plan that shows how
Derivatives are one aspect of the Federal credit union's overall
Interest Rate Risk mitigation strategy, and an analysis showing how the
Federal credit union will use Derivatives in conjunction with other on-
balance sheet instruments and strategies to effectively manage its
Interest Rate Risk;
(2) A list of the Derivatives products and characteristics of such
products the Federal credit union is planning to use;
(3) Draft policies and procedures that the Federal credit union has
prepared in accordance with Sec. 703.106 of this subpart;
(4) How the Federal credit union plans to acquire, employ, and/or
create the resources, policies, processes, systems, internal controls,
modeling, experience, and competencies to meet the requirements of this
subpart. This includes a description of how the Federal credit union
will ensure that Senior Executive Officers, the board of directors, and
personnel have the knowledge and experience in accordance with the
requirements of this subpart;
(5) A description of how the Federal credit union intends to use
external service providers as part of its Derivatives program, and a
list of the name(s) of and service(s) provided by the External Service
Providers, as described in Sec. 703.107 of this subpart, it intends to
use;
(6) A description of how the Federal credit union will support the
operations of Margining and collateral, as described in Sec. 703.104
of this subpart;
(7) A description of how the Federal credit union will comply with
the accounting and financial reporting in GAAP; and
(8) Any additional information requested by the Regional Director.
(c) Application review. (1) After the applicable Regional Director
has completed his or her review, including any requests for additional
information, the Regional Director will notify the Federal credit union
in writing of his or her decision. Any denials will include the
reason(s) for such denial. A Federal credit union subject to paragraph
(b) of
[[Page 68501]]
this section may not enter into any Derivative transactions under this
subpart until it receives approval from the applicable Regional
Director. At a Regional Director's discretion, a Federal credit union
may reapply if its initial application is denied.
(2) A Federal credit union that receives a denial of its
application may appeal such decision in accordance with part 746 of the
NCUA's regulations.
(d) Change in condition. A Federal credit union must immediately
cease entering into any new Derivatives and contact the applicable
Regional Director, if the Federal credit union experiences a change in
condition such that it no longer meets the requirements of paragraph
(a) of this section or renders its approved application inaccurate. The
applicable Regional Director may take all necessary actions, including,
but not limited to, revoking a Federal credit union's authority to
engage in Derivatives and/or requiring divesture of current
Derivatives.
Sec. 703.109 Regulatory violation or unsafe and unsound condition.
(a) Upon determination by the applicable Regional Director, and
written notice by the same, a Federal credit union that: No longer
meets the requirements of this subpart; if applicable, fails to comply
with its approved application; or is operating in an unsafe or unsound
condition must immediately stop entering into any new Derivative
transactions until the Federal credit union is notified by the
applicable Regional Director that it is permitted to resume engaging in
transactions under this subpart.
(b) If the applicable Regional Director renders an unsafe or
unsound condition in their determination, he or she will provide the
Federal credit union as part of the written notice the reason(s) for
such determination.
(c) During this period, however, the Federal credit union may
terminate existing Derivative transactions. A Regional Director may
permit a Federal credit union to enter into offsetting transactions if
he or she determines such transactions are part of a corrective action
strategy; and
(d) A Federal credit union that receives written notice under this
section may appeal such determination in accordance with part 746 of
the NCUA's regulations.
PART 741--REQUIREMENTS FOR INSURANCE
0
7. The authority citation for part 741 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1757, 1766(a), 1781-1790, and 1790d; 31
U.S.C. 3717.
0
8. Amend Sec. 741.219 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 741.219 Investment requirements.
* * * * *
(b) Any credit union which is insured pursuant to title II of the
Act must notify the applicable NCUA Regional Director in writing within
five business days after entering into its first Derivatives
transaction. Such transactions do not include those included in Sec.
703.14 of this chapter.
PART 746--APPEALS PROCEDURES
0
9. The authority citation for part 746 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1766, 1787, and 1789.
0
10. Amend Sec. 746.201 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 746.201 Authority, purpose, and scope.
* * * * *
(c) Scope. This subpart covers the appeal of initial agency
determinations by a program office which the petitioner has a right to
appeal to the NCUA Board under the following regulations: Sec. Sec.
701.14(e), 701.21(h)(3), 701.22(c), 701.23(h)(3), 701.32(b)(5), and
701.34(a)(4), appendix A to part 701 of this chapter, appendix B to
part 701 of this chapter, Chapters 1 through 4, Sec. Sec. 703.20(d),
703.108(b), 705.10(a), 708a.108(d), 708a.304(h), 708a.308(d), 709.7,
741.11(d), and 745.201(c), subpart J to part 747 of this chapter, and
Sec. 750.6(b).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-23968 Filed 10-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7535-01-P