After learning his trade's second request to extend the comment period had been denied, Cheney said, “NCUA Chairman Matz noted in her response letter that the comment period for the RBC rule is, effectively, 'one of the longest in NCUA history.' I agree that history is being made here – in that the proposed rule is one of the most significant ever for credit unions. That said: I still think credit unions deserve more time to consider all of the ways the proposal will affect them – and 90 days, or even 120, is just not enough time.”

NAFCU's Berger also responded to the news.

“It is difficult to understand how a rule like the derivatives investment rule, with its limited impact, could have two advance notices of proposed rulemaking and a proposed rule before being finalized, yet the NCUA will not grant similar scrutiny of a proposal that will affect all credit unions with more than $50 million in assets,” he said in a breaking bulletin released by the trade Thursday.

NAFCU Senior Vice President of Government Affairs and General Counsel Carrie Hunt provided additional comment on the extension request denial.

“We are asking for more time to review the risk-based capital proposal because credit unions have told NAFCU they need it. Credit unions are diligently working to analyze the risk-based proposal and provide their comments to the agency. They know that is the only way to persuade the agency to make meaningful changes to this proposed rule,” Hunt told CU Times.

“(The) NCUA has had an internal working group looking at the capital rule for more than two years. That speaks well of the agency's determination to draft a rule that will enhance the safety and soundness of the credit union industry. In fact, we think the agency would have benefited from a working group made up of credit unions prior to the rule being promulgated, and we suggested this on several occasions. Now we have this proposed rule, and we know that it will have a huge impact on the industry. We believe it is more than reasonable to ask for a bit more time to provide feedback,” she added.

NCUA Board Member Michael Fryzel told CU Times he supports an extension of the comment period, arguing that there is no need to rush the process. CLICK HERE to watch Fryzel explain his counter position.