In a letter to NCUA Chairman Debbie Matz, Reps. Frank Guinta (R-N.H.) andRuben Hinojosa (D-Texas) called upon the agency to extend the examcycle length for well-capitalized credit unions and provide atimeline for its efforts.

The two congressmen applauded the agency's 2015 regulatoryrelief efforts in the letter and requested that the agency continueto “find solutions to eliminate burdensome and duplicativeregulations.” They also expressed concern over the decline incredit unions since 2008, which they said was “due in no small partto overly burdensome regulations on the industry.”

Additionally, they cited a review of the agency's budget of $6.4 million for airfare and auto rentals,and suggested it move back to an extended examination cycle with anaverage of 18 months for well-run institutions as a way of reducingthese operating costs moving forward.

Guinta and Hinojosa added, “Doing so would be one way to holdthe line on, or even cut, duplicative examination expenses.Allowing more time in between examinations would minimize costs forthe agency and especially for smaller lower risk institutions.”

Moving to an 18-month exam cycle would preserve the NCUA'sability to address risk within the system in a timely manner, butalso allow the agency flexibility in its staffing and budgetingprocess, thus saving valuable time, resources and money for boththe NCUA and credit unions, the letter said.

They added the NCUA has the authority to implement an extendedexamination cycle, unlike otherfinancial institution regulators.

“We strongly encourage the agency to implement a new extendedexamination schedule for credit unions to help assist in yourregulatory relief efforts,” they said.

The letter concluded by asking whether the NCUA plans on movingtoward an extended examination cycle in 2016.

“If so, what is your timeline? If not, why not?” itquestioned.

Credit union trade associations applauded the letter to Matz, asboth CUNA and NAFCU have previously called upon the agency toincrease the examination cycle.