WASHINGTON-As North Carolina state charters gear up for what amounts to two separate exams by state and federal regulators, NASCUS is working to address the situation before it impacts the dual chartering system in the state.
"NASCUS is committed to trying to minimize any negative impact on the dual-chartering system and to ensure that going forward, there is a viable and functional regulatory environment for North Carolina's credit unions," NASCUS CEO Mary Martha Fortney said.
NASCUS' statement comes in response to letters North Carolina's state charters have received from NCUA informing them that the agency will be scheduling independent insurance reviews, instead of working in tandem with the North Carolina Credit Union Division (NCCUD) following a state-regulator-sanctioned move by State Employees CU, Raleigh, to publish its CAMEL rating (
NCUA also announced that NCCUD Administrator Jerrie Jay and her department are no longer welcome at joint training sessions and other working groups between NCUA and NASCUS, which puts the trade group for state regulators in a tricky position, as Jay is a member of the NASCUS board.
"A healthy and cooperative relationship between the state and federal regulator is in the best interests of both the regulator and the regulated," Fortney said. "Whenever that cooperation breaks down, as appears to be the case in North Carolina, that is a concern for NASCUS."
For members of NASCUS, it's a tough call between the desire to support a fellow state agency's right to make independent regulatory decisions without federal interference and the commonly held belief that it is best to keep exam information confidential.
"The issues presented by the situation in North Carolina are complicated. The prevailing sentiment for most states is that the CAMEL rating should remain confidential. Many state regulators believe that the public policy rationale for maintaining the confidentiality of the regulator's assessment of a financial institution outweighs the public policy benefits of its release," Fortney said. "However, it is not uncommon for regulators to be vested with the discretion to determine what information should be released in the public interest."
