[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 143 (Wednesday, July 27, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45005-45010]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-16009]



 ========================================================================
 Rules and Regulations
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
 having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
 to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
 under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
 
 The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 143 / Wednesday, July 27, 2022 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 45005]]



NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION

12 CFR Parts 700, 701, 702, 708a, 708b, 750, and 790

RIN 3133-AF41


Asset Threshold for Determining the Appropriate Supervisory 
Office

AGENCY: National Credit Union Administration (NCUA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The NCUA Board (Board) is amending its regulations to revise 
the $10 billion asset threshold used for assigning supervision of 
consumer federally insured credit unions (FICUs) to the Office of 
National Examinations and Supervision (ONES). The rule only applies to 
FICUs whose assets are $10 billion or more (covered credit unions). The 
rule provides that covered credit unions with less than $15 billion in 
total assets (tier I credit unions) will be supervised by the 
appropriate NCUA Regional Office. Covered credit unions with $15 
billion or more in total assets (tier II and tier III credit unions) 
continue to be supervised by ONES. The rule does not alter any 
regulatory requirements for covered credit unions.

DATES: The final rule is effective January 1, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dale Klein, Senior Financial Analyst, 
and Christopher DiBenedetto, Financial Analysts, Office of National 
Examinations and Supervision; or Rachel Ackmann, Senior Staff Attorney, 
Office of General Counsel, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314-3428. 
Dale Klein can also be reached at (703) 518-6629, Christopher 
DiBenedetto can be reached at (703) 518-6628, and Rachel Ackmann can be 
reached at (703) 548-2601.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

Part 702 Capital Planning and Stress Testing Requirements

    Part 702, subpart C, of the NCUA's regulations (part 702) 
implements the NCUA's capital planning and stress testing requirements 
for consumer FICUs.\1\ As discussed previously, a consumer FICU is 
defined as a covered credit union if it has $10 billion or more in 
total assets.\2\ Covered credit unions are then further divided into 
the following three asset tiers:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 12 CFR 702.301. The term consumer FICU is being used instead 
of the term natural person FICU. This terminology is being used for 
clarity; however, the term natural person FICU will continue to be 
used for the accompanying regulatory text changes for consistency 
with other sections of the NCUA's regulations.
    \2\ 12 CFR 702.302.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     A tier I credit union is a covered credit union that has 
less than $15 billion in total assets;
     A tier II credit union is a covered credit union that has 
$15 billion or more in total assets, but less than $20 billion in total 
assets, or is otherwise designated as a tier II credit union by the 
NCUA; and
     A tier III credit union is a covered credit union that has 
$20 billion or more in total assets, or is otherwise designated as a 
tier III credit union by the NCUA.
    Incremental levels of regulatory requirements are based on the 
three tiers. For example, only tier II and tier III credit unions are 
subject to stress testing requirements.

Agency Structure

    In 2012, the NCUA established the Office of National Examinations 
and Supervision (ONES), and reorganized its central and field office 
structure. As part of its internal restructuring, the NCUA transferred 
the responsibility for supervising covered credit unions to ONES from 
the Regional Offices.\3\ Initially, covered credit unions were 
transferred to ONES on January 1, 2014. Annually thereafter, FICUs 
newly reporting assets of $10 billion or more on March 31 of a given 
calendar year are reassigned to ONES on the first day of the following 
calendar year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In general, Regional Office means the office of NCUA located 
in the designated geographical areas in which the office of the FICU 
is located.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

COVID-19 Pandemic

    Many FICUs have experienced significant balance sheet growth as a 
result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the corresponding policy 
response.\4\ For example, FICUs nearing the $10 billion asset threshold 
incurred balance sheet growth of about 14 percent on average during the 
COVID-19 pandemic, and in one case more than 34 percent. In contrast, 
similarly sized FICUs had an average asset growth rate of only nine 
percent in 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See generally, 86 FR 15397 (Mar. 23, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In March 2021, the Board temporarily modified its rules for FICUs 
meeting certain asset thresholds through an interim final rule (Asset 
Threshold IFR).\5\ The Asset Threshold IFR permitted FICUs to continue 
to use financial data as of March 31, 2020, to determine the 
applicability of certain regulations for calendar years 2021 and 2022, 
instead of assets reported as of March 31, 2021. The Asset Threshold 
IFR also made a conforming amendment to the measurement date for 
determining ONES supervision. Under the Asset Threshold IFR, the NCUA 
used financial data as of March 31, 2020, instead of March 31, 2021, to 
determine the appropriate supervisory office of FICUs for calendar year 
2022. As a result, no FICU was transitioned to ONES supervision for 
calendar year 2022, even if the FICU had $10 billion or more in total 
assets as of March 31, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The next effective measurement period to determine whether a FICU 
is subject to capital planning and stress testing requirements and ONES 
supervision was March 31, 2022. Eight new FICUs met or exceeded the $10 
billion threshold as of March 31, 2022, and will become subject to ONES 
supervision beginning January 1, 2023, unless the threshold is changed.

II. The Proposed Rule

    On February 17, 2022, the Board published a proposed rule that 
reconsidered its policy of assigning all covered credit unions to ONES 
supervision.\6\ The Board received five comments on the proposed rule. 
Comments were received from a credit union, a credit union league, two 
trade associations, and an association of state

[[Page 45006]]

credit union supervisors. All of the commenters were generally 
supportive of increasing the threshold used for determining whether a 
covered credit union will be subject to ONES supervision, and some 
commenters reiterated the rationale for the change discussed in the 
proposed rule. All commenters, however, raised additional 
considerations for the Board, and some commenters recommended specific 
changes to the proposed rule. The comments are discussed in detail in 
the next section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 87 FR 11996 (Mar. 3, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. The Final Rule

    The Board has reconsidered its policy of assigning all covered 
credit unions to ONES supervision and is adopting the proposed rule as 
final. Under the final rule, tier II and tier III credit unions remain 
subject to ONES supervision. The Board, however, will not assign tier I 
credit unions to ONES supervision.\7\ Tier I credit unions will remain 
subject to Regional Office supervision until they become tier II credit 
unions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As discussed in the Reservation of Authority section, the 
Board has the option of using its existing reservation of authority 
in part 702 to designate a FICU as subject to ONES or Regional 
Office supervision, or a tier I, II, or III credit union.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the proposed rule, the Board has reconsidered its 
position that all covered credit unions should transition to ONES for 
two reasons. First, the agency can more effectively manage its 
resources by continuing to supervise most tier I credit unions through 
the Regional Offices. Second, the Board has reconsidered the level of 
risk to the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund (NCUSIF) posed 
by tier I credit unions. To implement the change, the rule creates a 
new definition of ``ONES credit union'' to distinguish between covered 
credit unions subject to ONES supervision and covered credit unions 
subject to Regional Office supervision.\8\ The term ONES credit union 
is defined as all tier II and tier III credit unions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In the proposed rule, the definition of ``ONES credit 
union'' was added to part 702. One commenter recommended a technical 
change to include the proposed definition of ``ONES credit union'' 
in Sec.  700.2 instead of part 702. The Board agrees with this 
recommendation and has moved the defined term ``ONES credit union'' 
to part 700 instead of part 702. This change does not alter the 
substance of the provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter recommended increasing the threshold for ONES 
supervision from $15 billion, as proposed, to $20 billion to better 
reflect growth of insured shares. The commenter stated that a $20 
billion threshold would better align the scope of ONES supervision with 
the risk of the industry's largest credit unions. As support, the 
commenter stated that both the insured share base and the NCUSIF have 
increased by 95 percent since 2013, so a $10 billion FICU in 2013 would 
pose the same risk to the NCUSIF as a $20 billion FICU would today. 
This commenter further requested that if the Board does not increase 
the threshold for ONES supervision from the proposed $15 billion, the 
NCUA should include a more complete description of the agency's risk 
assumptions, including a description of whether the historical loss 
rate has changed significantly over time, in the final rule. The 
commenter stated the current thresholds are conservative and requested 
additional support for the thresholds.
    The Board has not made changes to the final rule in response to 
this comment. The Board does not believe that tier II credit unions, 
which conduct credit union-run supervisory stress tests, should be 
supervised by the Regional Offices, regardless of the growth of insured 
assets or the NCUSIF. The Board continues to believe that ONES is the 
more appropriate office to supervise credit unions that are subject to 
credit union-run stress testing requirements due to the resources and 
specialization required to oversee supervisory stress tests.
    In addition to increasing the threshold for ONES supervision, two 
commenters requested that the Board raise the asset-based thresholds in 
part 702 related to the substantive requirements. One commenter 
suggested increasing the range for all three asset tiers by $5 billion. 
Another commenter noted that credit unions are subject to stress 
testing at a smaller size than banks and stated that if the tier I 
threshold is increased to $20 billion, then the other thresholds should 
increase as well.
    The Board has not made any changes to the final rule in response to 
these comments. First, as discussed in a previous rulemaking, the Board 
does not consider the risks that banks pose to the Deposit Insurance 
Fund as analogous to the risks that covered credit unions pose to the 
NCUSIF, and therefore, does not believe that at this time the size 
thresholds for banks are an appropriate analogy for size thresholds for 
covered credit unions.\9\ Second, the Board believes that size is one 
of the primary indicators of systemic risk to the NCUSIF. Given the 
change in relative risk of tier I credit unions to the NCUSIF and the 
NCUA's advancement of large credit union supervisory tools, the Board 
does not believe that Regional Office supervision of tier I credit 
unions results in undue risk to the NCUSIF. However, the Board believes 
the absolute risk of a tier I credit union remains a material exposure 
to the NCUSIF and increasing the tier I asset threshold for the 
regulatory requirements would unduly increase the NCUSIF's contributed 
capital at risk. For example, the NCUSIF's capital at risk to a tier I 
credit union is estimated at roughly 20 percent of the NCUSIF's 
contributed capital. Therefore, the Board continues to believe that 
covered credit unions with $10 billion or more in total assets 
represent sufficient risk to the NCUSIF such that capital planning and 
stress testing requirements are warranted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 83 FR 17901 (Apr. 25, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposed rule, tier I credit unions that were supervised 
by ONES were grandfathered and remained subject to ONES supervision. 
Two commenters expressly agreed with grandfathering tier I credit 
unions currently subject to ONES supervision. In response to a specific 
question in the preamble, one of these commenters requested a technical 
change to the final rule to clarify that tier I credit unions that are 
not grandfathered are excluded from the definition of ``ONES credit 
union.'' Another commenter did not support grandfathering all tier I 
credit unions and, instead, recommended that tier I credit unions 
currently supervised by ONES have the option of either remaining under 
ONES supervision or being transferred to the appropriate Regional 
Offices.
    The Board is finalizing the rule without the grandfather clause for 
tier I credit unions already supervised by ONES, as this provision has 
become unnecessary. All credit unions currently supervised by ONES have 
reported assets of $15 billion or more as of March 31, 2022. 
Accordingly, all credit unions assigned to ONES will be categorized as 
tier II or tier III effective January 1, 2023, and remain with ONES 
under this final rule.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The effective date of the final rule is January 1, 2023. 
This date aligns with part 702 as a credit union that crosses the 
asset threshold as of March 31 of a given calendar year is not 
subject to the applicable requirements of part 702 until the 
following calendar year. Here, credit unions that crossed any asset 
tier threshold on March 31, 2022, would not be subject to any newly 
applicable requirements of part 702 until January 1, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the final rule, all covered credit unions remain subject to 
enhanced capital planning and stress testing data collections.\11\ One 
commenter provided comments about subjecting all covered

[[Page 45007]]

credit unions to the enhanced data collection. First, the commenter 
recommended limiting the number of specialized data collections 
applicable to tier I credit unions. The commenter expressed concerns 
about the usefulness of the data if the Regional Offices would not be 
using it to perform specialized examinations. The commenter also was 
concerned about the Regional Offices' ability to manage and 
contextualize the data collected. Second, the commenter requested that 
the NCUA clarify that ONES will be managing the data collection process 
for all tier I credit unions and that ONES will be the point of contact 
for resolving any data collection issues. The commenter was concerned 
with ONES acting as the aggregator of all data collections due to the 
resource limitations discussed in the proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 12 CFR 702.306(d). The Board notes that the final rule 
includes a clarifying edit related to 12 CFR 702.306(d) to clarify 
that the data collection applies to all covered credit unions, which 
reflects current NCUA practice. See also, 12 U.S.C. 1756 and 1784; 
and 12 CFR 741.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Data collection is part of the NCUA's strategic initiative to 
enhance supervision and is used to inform qualitative and quantitative 
assessments of covered credit unions. The Board does not believe the 
data collection presents an undue burden to covered credit unions as 
the data is the type of information the Board expects covered credit 
unions to be analyzing and considering on their own regardless of 
whether the NCUA collects the information. In regard to the commenter's 
concern on the continued use of the data, ONES will share the analysis 
and reporting with Regional Offices, and the data will continue to be 
used by the agency to assess a covered credit union's capital adequacy 
through review of its capital plan. Additionally, the ongoing 
coordination between ONES and Regional Offices has included discussions 
on the analysis and use of collected data to inform the supervisory 
process. The Board also notes that the collected data can drive 
supervisory efficiencies for covered credit unions that may reduce 
regulatory burden, as the data provides insight for offsite supervision 
and enables timely risk identification and mitigation. For example, the 
data may lead to more targeted supervisory work resulting in less time 
on-site at covered credit unions.
    Finally, the Board confirms that ONES will be managing the data 
collection process for all tier I credit unions and that ONES will be 
the point of contact for resolving any data collection issues, in 
collaboration with the assigned Regional Office. The Board believes 
that ONES has sufficient resources to manage the data collection 
process for all covered credit unions, including those that will be 
supervised by the Regional Offices. Therefore, the final rule has not 
amended the current data collection requirements.
    A few commenters also raised general concerns about coordination 
between regional and ONES examiners and training regional examiners to 
oversee tier I credit unions' capital plans. One commenter encouraged 
ONES to periodically assess the consistency of capital planning 
supervision conducted by Regional Offices to ensure capital planning 
practices are aligned with ONES' expectations. The commenter was 
concerned about the potential for covered credit unions to be 
confronted with different standards when they advance to ONES 
supervision. Another commenter expressed concern about risk to the 
NCUSIF and urged the Board to closely monitor for any unintended 
consequences of the change and ensure there is sufficient specialized 
expertise at the Regional Office level to properly supervise tier I 
credit unions. The commenter urged the agency to ensure close 
collaboration between ONES and the Regional Offices on an indefinite 
basis.
    The Board agrees with commenters on the need for close 
collaboration between ONES and Regional Offices to ensure continuity 
and sound supervision for covered credit unions. As discussed 
previously, the Board intends for the coordination between ONES and 
Regional Offices to be ongoing. The Board notes that ONES is providing 
a capital plan training program to Regional Offices to ensure 
consistency of review across the NCUA. And while the Regional Offices 
are equipped to provide sound supervision of tier 1 credit unions, the 
Board will explore ongoing enhancements to the supervisory capabilities 
and approaches for large credit unions assigned to the Regional 
Offices.
    The Board also notes that the scope of Regional Office examinations 
will remain consistent with the scope of ONES' examinations as both 
offices are subject to the same national examination standards. As 
such, the Board does not expect the review of capital plans or the 
general supervision of tier I credit unions to be materially different 
under the Regional Offices. The NCUA has also implemented various 
supervisory tools that enhance offsite monitoring of covered credit 
union risk. Under the final rule, these tools remain in use for the 
supervision of tier I credit unions regardless of their supervisory 
office, including enhanced data collection. Additionally, as discussed 
in the proposed rule, there are no changes to the enhanced regulatory 
requirements for covered credit unions. Therefore, the Board does not 
believe that Regional Office supervision of tier I credit unions 
results in undue risk to the NCUSIF.
    Two commenters raised the issue of coordination with the Consumer 
Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Specifically, these commenters 
urged the Board to ensure that coordination exists between the Regional 
Offices and the CFPB to prevent instances of examination overlap or 
confusion resulting from the application of differing standards and 
expectations. The Board understands the importance of both ongoing 
interagency and intra-agency coordination and will ensure there is 
coordination between the appropriate NCUA supervisory office and the 
CFPB.
    Another commenter recommended that the Board consider a longer-term 
strategy for managing the scope of ONES supervision. The commenter 
stated that as long as industry assets continue to grow, it is only a 
matter of time before the number of ONES-supervised credit unions 
increases. The commenter stated that adopting a larger tier I asset 
threshold is one way for the agency to make the most of existing 
resources while undertaking a more comprehensive analysis of how best 
to allocate supervisory resources as industry assets continue to grow. 
The Board agrees with the commenter that longer-term strategic planning 
is an important part of its resource allocation. The Board notes that 
the annual budget process has been one tool used to evaluate its long-
term resource needs.

Reservation of Authority

    The Board may use existing reservations of authority in part 702 to 
designate a FICU as subject to ONES or Regional Office supervision, or 
a tier I, II, or III credit union. For example, the Board could use its 
reservation of authority to subject a tier I credit union that would 
otherwise be supervised by a Regional Office to ONES supervision. Or, 
in contrast, the Board may exercise its reservation of authority to 
have a tier II credit union remain subject to Regional Office 
supervision. Independent of its use of the reservation of authority to 
designate an appropriate supervisory office, the Board may also use its 
reservation of authority to designate a credit union as a tier I, II, 
or III credit union.
    In response to a specific solicitation of comments on this issue, 
four commenters discussed the Board's potential use of its reservation 
of authority. Two commenters had concerns that the use of this 
authority may lack appropriate guardrails and suggested the Board adopt 
specific

[[Page 45008]]

guidelines on when this authority could be used. The Board is declining 
to adopt specific written guidelines at this time. The Board has not 
proposed changes to its current reservation of authority and believes 
that the existing rule provides sufficient information on factors the 
Board would consider before using its authority. The proposed rule 
stated that when making any such determination, the Board will consider 
all relevant factors affecting the covered credit union's safety and 
soundness, such as its activities, business model, risk-management 
practices, and the types of assets held. The proposed rule also stated 
that any exercise of authority under this section by the NCUA will be 
in writing and consider the financial condition, size, complexity, risk 
profile, scope of operations, and level of net worth of the covered 
credit union, in addition to any other relevant factors. The Board 
believes any additional guidelines on use of the reservation of 
authority would unnecessarily reduce the Board's flexibility to address 
the riskiness of a credit union. The Board notes, however, that this 
authority has never been used and that the Board expects use of such 
authority would continue to be limited.
    These commenters also asked the Board to clarify the appeal rights 
of a covered credit union in any situation when the reservation of 
authority is invoked. The Board has declined adopting an appeal process 
because the Board has not delegated this authority and would itself 
exercise the reservation of authority. Another commenter generally 
stated that it is important that the NCUA have a clearly demonstrated 
rationale for using the reservation of authority, but acknowledged that 
instances may arise that require the NCUA to employ greater oversight 
over a credit union. When deciding to use its authority, the Board 
would consider all relevant factors affecting the complex credit 
union's safety and soundness and would state its rationale to the 
credit union. The Board expects to provide a credit union subject to 
proposed use of the reservation of authority with an opportunity to 
present evidence on why the agency should not proceed with use of the 
authority.
    Finally, one commenter stated that the reservation of authority 
should include an express requirement that the NCUA would consult and 
cooperate with state regulators before transferring a tier I state-
chartered FICU (FISCU) to ONES. The Board does not believe an express 
requirement is necessary; however, it expects consultation with state 
regulators would occur prior to exercising its authority under the 
final rule.

Comments Outside the Scope of the Proposed Rule

    One commenter recommended that the Board harmonize when a credit 
union is designated as a covered credit union with the CFPB's 
calculation of its $10 billion asset threshold. Specifically, the NCUA 
should calculate total assets as the average of the covered credit 
union's total assets as reported on its Call Reports for the preceding 
four quarters.
    One commenter recommended considering making a change to the asset-
size threshold for FISCUs' examination cycles. According to this 
commenter, under a 2016 NCUA policy, NCUA examines every FISCU with 
assets of $1 billion or greater every 8-12 months. The commenter 
recommended raising the threshold to $3 billion or greater.
    These comments were outside the scope of the proposed rule. 
However, the Board will take them into consideration for future 
rulemakings or policy updates.

IV. Legal Authority

    The Board is issuing this final rule pursuant to its authority 
under the Federal Credit Union Act (FCU Act).\12\ Under the FCU Act, 
the NCUA is the chartering and supervisory authority for Federal credit 
unions (FCUs) and the Federal supervisory authority for FICUs. The FCU 
Act grants the NCUA a broad mandate to issue regulations governing both 
FCUs and FICUs. Section 120 of the FCU Act is a general grant of 
regulatory authority and authorizes the Board to prescribe regulations 
for the administration of the FCU Act.\13\ Section 209 of the FCU Act 
is a plenary grant of regulatory authority to the NCUA to issue 
regulations necessary or appropriate to carry out its role as share 
insurer for all FICUs.\14\ Accordingly, the FCU Act grants the Board 
broad rulemaking authority to ensure that the credit union industry and 
the NCUSIF remain safe and sound.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 12 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.
    \13\ 12 U.S.C. 1766(a).
    \14\ 12 U.S.C. 1789.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Regulatory Procedures

Effective Date

    The effective date of the final rule is January 1, 2023. This date 
aligns with part 702 as a credit union that crosses the asset threshold 
as of March 31 of a given calendar year is not subject to the 
applicable requirements of part 702 until the following calendar year. 
Here, credit unions that crossed any asset tier threshold on March 31, 
2022, would not be subject to any newly applicable requirements of part 
702 until January 1, 2023.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) applies to rulemakings in 
which an agency by rule creates a new paperwork burden on regulated 
entities or modifies an existing burden (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)). For 
purposes of the PRA, a paperwork burden may take the form of a 
reporting, recordkeeping, or a third-party disclosure requirement, 
referred to as an information collection. The final rule does not 
affect any existing or impose any new information collection 
requirements.
    The information collection requirement that tier I credit unions 
retain a record of their annual capital plan will remain in effect 
regardless of a covered credit union's supervisory office and is 
approved under Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number 
3133-0199, Capital Planning and Stress Testing.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires that when 
an agency issues a proposed rule or a final rule pursuant to the 
Administrative Procedure Act or another law, the agency must prepare a 
regulatory flexibility analysis that meets the requirements of the RFA 
and publish such analysis in the Federal Register. Specifically, the 
RFA normally requires agencies to describe the impact of a rulemaking 
on small entities by providing a regulatory impact analysis. For 
purposes of the RFA, the Board considers credit unions with assets less 
than $100 million to be small entities.\15\ 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 final rule affects the supervisory office assigned to oversee FICUs 
with $10 billion or more in total assets. Therefore, the Board 
certifies that it does not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small credit unions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ NCUA Interpretive Ruling and Policy Statement 15-1, 80 FR 
57512 (Sept. 24, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Executive Order 13132

    Executive Order 13132 encourages independent regulatory agencies to

[[Page 45009]]

consider the impact of their actions on state and local interests. The 
NCUA, an independent regulatory agency as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5), 
voluntarily complies with the executive order to adhere to fundamental 
federalism principles.
    This final rule does not have substantial direct effects on the 
states, on the relationship between the National Government and the 
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government. The NCUA has therefore determined that 
this 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 final rule does not affect family 
well-being within the meaning of section 654 of the Treasury and 
General Government Appropriations Act, 1999.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681 (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 
(SBREFA) generally provides for congressional review of agency 
rules.\17\ A reporting requirement is triggered in instances where the 
NCUA issues a final rule as defined in the Administrative Procedure 
Act.\18\ Besides being subject to congressional oversight, an agency 
rule may also be subject to a delayed effective date if it is a ``major 
rule.'' The NCUA believes that this final rule is not a ``major rule.'' 
As required by SBREFA, the NCUA will submit this final rule to the 
Office of Management and Budget for it to determine if it is a ``major 
rule'' for purposes of SBREFA. The NCUA also will file appropriate 
reports with Congress and the Government Accountability Office so this 
rule may be reviewed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 5 U.S.C. 551.
    \18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects

12 CFR Part 700

    Credit unions.

12 CFR Part 701

    Credit, Credit unions, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

12 CFR Part 702

    Credit unions, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

12 CFR Part 708a

    Credit unions, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

12 CFR Part 708b

    Bank deposit insurance, Credit unions, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

12 CFR Part 750

    Credit unions, Golden parachute payments, Indemnity payments.

12 CFR Part 790

    Organization and functions (Government agencies).

    By the NCUA Board on July 21, 2022.
Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks,
Secretary of the Board.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Board amends 12 CFR 
parts 700, 701, 702, 708a, 708b, 750, and 790 as follows:

PART 700--DEFINITIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 700 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  12 U.S.C. 1752, 1757(6), 1766.


0
2. In Sec.  700.2, add a definition of ``ONES credit union'' in 
alphabetical order and revise the definitions of ``Regional Director'' 
and ``Regional Office'' to read as follows:


Sec.  700.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    ONES credit union means a credit union subject to supervision by 
the Office of National Examinations and Supervision (ONES) and includes 
tier II and tier III credit unions, as defined under part 702 of this 
chapter. Tier I credit unions are subject to supervision by the 
appropriate Regional Office.
* * * * *
    Regional Director means the representative of NCUA in the 
designated geographical area in which the office of the federally 
insured credit union is located or, for ONES credit unions, the 
Director of the Office of National Examinations and Supervision.
    Regional Office means the office of NCUA located in the designated 
geographical areas in which the office of the federally insured credit 
union is located or, for ONES credit unions, the Office of National 
Examinations and Supervision.
* * * * *

PART 701--ORGANIZATION AND OPERATION OF FEDERAL CREDIT UNIONS

0
3. 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, 1785, 1786, 1787, 1788, 1789. 
Section 701.6 is also authorized by 15 U.S.C. 3717. Section 701.31 
is also authorized by 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 1981 and 
3601-3610. Section 701.35 is also authorized by 42 U.S.C. 4311-4312.


0
4. In Sec.  701.14, revise paragraph (c)(3)(i) to read as follows:


Sec.  701.14  Change in official or senior executive officer in credit 
unions that are newly chartered or are in troubled condition.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) Where to file. Notices will be filed with the appropriate 
Regional Director or, in the case of a corporate credit union or a ONES 
credit union under part 700 of this chapter, with the Director of the 
Office of National Examinations and Supervision. All references to 
Regional Director will, for corporate credit unions and ONES credit 
unions under part 700 of this chapter, mean the Director of Office of 
National Examinations and Supervision. State-chartered federally 
insured credit unions will also file a copy of the notice with their 
state supervisor.
* * * * *

PART 702--CAPITAL ADEQUACY

0
5. The authority citation for part 702 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  12 U.S.C. 1766(a), 1784(a), 1786(e), 1790d.


0
6. In Sec.  702.306, revise paragraph (d) to read as follows:


Sec.  702.306  Annual supervisory stress testing.

* * * * *
    (d) Information collection. Upon request, the covered credit union 
must provide NCUA with any relevant qualitative or quantitative 
information requested by NCUA pertinent to the capital plans or stress 
tests under this part.
* * * * *

PART 708a--BANK CONVERSIONS AND MERGERS

0
7. The authority citation for part 708a continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  12 U.S.C. 1766, 1785(b), and 1785(c).


0
8. In Sec.  708a.101, revise the second sentence of the definition of 
``Regional Director'' to read as follows:


Sec.  708a.101  Definitions.

* * * * *

[[Page 45010]]

    Regional Director * * * For corporate credit unions and natural 
person credit unions defined as ONES credit unions under part 700 of 
this chapter, Regional Director means the Director of NCUA's Office of 
National Examinations and Supervision.
* * * * *

0
9. In Sec.  708a.301, revise the second sentence of the definition of 
``Regional Director'' to read as follows:


Sec.  708a.301  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Regional Director * * * For corporate credit unions and natural 
person credit unions defined as ONES credit unions under part 700 of 
this chapter, Regional Director means the Director of NCUA's Office of 
National Examinations and Supervision.
* * * * *

PART 708b--MERGERS OF INSURED CREDIT UNIONS INTO OTHER CREDIT 
UNIONS; VOLUNTARY TERMINATION OR CONVERSION OF INSURED STATUS

0
10. The authority citation for part 708b continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  12 U.S.C. 1752(7), 1766, 1785, 1786, 1789.


0
11. In Sec.  708b.2, revise the second sentence of the definition of 
``Regional Director'' to read as follows:


Sec.  708b.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Regional Director * * * For corporate credit unions and natural 
person credit unions defined as ONES credit unions under part 700 of 
this chapter, Regional Director means the Director of NCUA's Office of 
National Examinations and Supervision.
* * * * *

PART 750--GOLDEN PARACHUTE AND INDEMNIFICATION PAYMENTS

0
12. The authority citation for part 750 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  12 U.S.C. 1786(t).


0
13. In Sec.  750.6, revise the third sentence of paragraph (a) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  750.6  Filing instructions; appeal.

    (a) * * * In the case of a Federal or state-chartered corporate 
credit union or a ONES credit union under part 700 of this chapter, 
such written requests must be submitted to the Director of the Office 
of National Examinations and Supervision. * * *
* * * * *

PART 790--DESCRIPTION OF NCUA; REQUESTS FOR AGENCY ACTION

0
14. The authority citation for part 790 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  12 U.S.C. 1766, 1789, 1795f.


0
15. In Sec.  790.2, revise the first sentence of paragraph (c)(2) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  790.2  Central and field office organization.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * * Similar to a Regional Director, the Director of the 
Office of National Examinations and Supervision manages NCUA's 
supervisory program over credit unions; however, it oversees the 
activities for corporate credit unions and of natural person credit 
unions defined as ONES credit unions under part 700 of this chapter, in 
accordance with established policies. * * *

[FR Doc. 2022-16009 Filed 7-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7535-01-P