It appears the agency is taking steps to do that. After releasing its proposal, NCUA held three widely attended listening sessions where credit unions expressed their concerns directly with NCUA officials, including Chairman Debbie Matz, and senior staff.

The agency has identified for review and possible change five proposed asset-group risk weights such as investments, CUSOs, corporate credit unions, mortgages and member business loans. The NCUA also formed a Risk-Based Capital Practitioners' Council, which includes NAFCU members and industry representatives and will review the proposal and provide NCUA feedback.

While NAFCU and our member credit unions welcome the NCUA's efforts, the call to amend the proposal and thoroughly review its impact on the credit union industry continues.

In recent months, we witnessed the alarm this proposal has caused on Capitol Hill. In a rare bipartisan effort – and encouraged by NAFCU – 324 lawmakers joined together in May to write Chairman Matz of their concerns regarding the proposed rule's potential impact on credit unions and credit union members. Numerous others, including Sens. Dean Heller (R-Nev.), and Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), and House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chairman Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.), have also weighed in to urge the agency to exercise care in pursuing this proposed rule.

In a House subcommittee hearing this summer on regulatory burden, NAFCU witness David Clendaniel, president/CEO of the $407 million Dover Federal Credit Union in Dover, Del., called NCUA's proposal a "one-size-fits-all" measure that would stifle growth, innovation and diversification. Rep. Ed Royce (R-Calif.), solicited feedback during that hearing and found the concerns were significant enough that he advocated requiring NCUA to study its proposal and report back to Congress before a final rule is set.

Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Mo.), a member of the House Financial Services Committee, proposed to implement such a requirement through an amendment to H.R. 4042, a bill that would require regulators to stop and study certain aspects of the new Basel III rules affecting community banks' mortgage servicing assets.

His amendment would have applied a similar stop and study requirement to the NCUA's risk-based capital proposal. While H.R. 4042 was reported out without this change, committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), said he supports Leutkemeyer's effort and will pursue parity for credit unions as this bill moves forward.

The NCUA has followed these developments, and it has indicated it will make significant changes throughout the proposed rule. While NAFCU sees this as a positive, we are staying vigilant to ensure credit unions' concerns are fully addressed in any final rule. And if significant changes are made as Chairman Matz has indicated, a second comment period is not only necessary but required by the Administrative Procedures Act.

NAFCU members have done a fantastic job making their concerns known. Credit unions sent the NCUA more than 2,000 comment letters on the RBC proposal, and they flocked to the agency's listening sessions. Now, they're converging on Capitol Hill to talk to their lawmakers directly about this and other important issues during NAFCU's Congressional Caucus, Sept. 9-12.

NAFCU is continuing its push for risk weights that are reasonable, and we are advocating for an implementation period of at least three years as well as the aforementioned second comment period. NAFCU cannot stress enough how important it is that NCUA create a fair regulation that allows credit unions to remain competitive and strengthens their ability to serve their members.

Whatever the final rule is, it needs to be thoroughly reviewed, tested and proven to ensure a viable credit union industry for years to come.

B. Dan Berger is president/CEO of NAFCU. He can be reached at 703-522-4770 or [email protected].