First the good news: The NCUA took some steps in the right direction this week when it announced reforms to its exam process. Chairman Debbie Matz's letter to credit unions about the changes addressed complaints I've been hearing for quite a while.

For example, the NCUA revised its supervision policy manual to clarify that credit union management should determine how they will correct DOR issues. Matz softened the decision a bit by saying reasonable solutions will become the corrective plan—I'm assuming the NCUA will determine what is reasonable, which means ultimately they still have the last word.

The agency also added more structure to its exam findings and DOR process, including the release of standardized forms for both. The supervision policy manual makes it pretty clear what problems fit the DOR definition and which don't, and it seems like these changes and others should help both examiners and credit unions clarify what has been a subjective DOR process.