Examination Guidance, 16895-16899 [E8-6560]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 62 / Monday, March 31, 2008 / Notices
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques, or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
activity. NIH Grants Policy Statement,
Rev. 12/2003; https://grants.nih.gov/
grants/policy/nihgps_2003/
NIHGPS_Part2.htm#_Toc54600040
Dated: March 25, 2008.
Sally J. Rockey,
Deputy Director, Office of Extramural
Research, National Institutes of Health.
[FR Doc. E8–6579 Filed 3–28–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Form I–508, Extension of a
Currently Approved Information
Collection; Comment Request
60-Day Notice of Information
Collection Under Review: Form I–508,
Waiver of Rights, Privileges, Exemptions
and Immunities; OMB Control No.
1615–0025.
mmaher on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
ACTION:
The Department of Homeland
Security, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS), has
submitted the following information
collection request for review and
clearance in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The
information collection is published to
obtain comments from the public and
affected agencies. Comments are
encouraged and will be accepted for
sixty days until May 30, 2008.
Written comments and suggestions
regarding items contained in this notice,
and especially with regard to the
estimated public burden and associated
response time should be directed to the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS), USCIS, Chief, Regulatory
Management Division, Clearance Office,
111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite
3008, Washington, DC 20529.
Comments may also be submitted to
DHS via facsimile to 202–272–8352, or
via e-mail at rfs.regs@dhs.gov. When
submitting comments by email please
add the OMB Control Number 1615–
0025 in the subject box.
Written comments and suggestions
from the public and affected agencies
concerning the proposed collection of
information should address one or more
of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:00 Mar 28, 2008
Jkt 214001
Overview of This Information
Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
Extension of a currently approved
collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Waiver of Rights, Privileges,
Exemptions, and Immunities.
(3) Agency form number, if any, and
the applicable component of the
Department of Homeland Security
sponsoring the collection: Form I–508.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: Individuals or
households. This form is used by the
USCIS to determine eligibility of an
applicant to retain the status of an alien
lawfully admitted to the United States
for permanent residence.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: 1,800 responses at 5 minutes
(.083) per response.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: 149 annual burden hours.
If you have additional comments,
suggestions, or need a copy of the
information collection instrument,
please visit the USCIS Web site at :
https://www.regulations.gov/.
We may also be contacted at: USCIS,
Regulatory Management Division, 111
Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite
3008, Washington, DC 20529, telephone
number 202–272–8377.
Dated: March 24, 2008.
Stephen Tarragon,
Acting Chief, Regulatory Management
Division, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. E8–6570 Filed 3–28–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–10–P
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16895
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Office of Federal Housing Enterprise
Oversight
Examination Guidance
Office of Federal Housing
Enterprise Oversight, HUD.
ACTION: Notice of Final Examination
Guidance—Conforming Loan Limit
Calculations; Response to Comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Office of Federal Housing
Enterprise Oversight is publishing today
an Examination Guidance, ‘‘Conforming
Loan Limit Calculations,’’ following two
requests for public comment on a
proposed examination guidance.
Material in the guidance does not
constitute a regulation.
DATES: March 31, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have any questions regarding
OFHEO’s Examination Guidance—
Conforming Loan Limit Calculations,
you may contact Alfred M. Pollard,
General Counsel, at (202) 414–3800 (not
a toll free number). The telephone
number for the Telecommunications
Device for the Deaf is: (800) 877–8339
(TDD Only).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OFHEO’s
Examination Guidance on Conforming
Loan Limit Calculations is posted on the
Internet at https://www.ofheo.gov. This
document, as well as all others
mentioned in the preamble can also be
accessed on business days between the
hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m., at the
Office of Federal Housing Enterprise
Oversight, Fourth Floor, 1700 G Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20552. To make
an appointment to inspect documents,
please call the Office of General Counsel
at (202) 414–6924.
I. Background and Statement on the
Conforming Loan Limit for 2008
On November 15, 2006, OFHEO
announced that any decline in the
house price index used to establish the
conforming loan limit would not result
in a decline in that limit for 2007.
OFHEO also committed at that time, to
providing updated guidance on how
future reductions in the relevant house
price index would affect the conforming
loan limit.
On June 20, 2007, OFHEO released on
its Web site for public comment, a
proposed revision to its existing
Examination Guidance entitled
‘‘Conforming Loan Limit Calculations’’
(the original proposal). Subsequently,
on October 22, 2007, OFHEO published
in the Federal Register for public
comment a revised version of that
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
31MRN1
16896
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 62 / Monday, March 31, 2008 / Notices
mmaher on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
proposed guidance (the revised
proposal). Today, OFHEO is issuing the
final Examination Guidance.
II. Comments Received on revised
Examination Guidance—Conforming
Loan Limit Calculations
Calculations for the conforming loan
limit establish the maximum size of
loans that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
may purchase, as provided in their
charters. The conforming loan limit is
adjusted annually through a calculation
of year over year changes to the existing
level of home prices based on data from
the Federal Housing Finance Board’s
Monthly Interest Rate Survey (MIRS).
A. Guidance Proposals. OFHEO
provided for public comment on the
proposed examination guidance through
OFHEO’s Web site on June 20, 2007,
and at the end of a thirty day comment
period, some 23 comments from 25
organizations (representing over 2
million individuals and businesses) and
individual comments were received.
OFHEO took these comments into
consideration, altered its proposed draft
guidance and reissued it for further
public comment on October 22, 2007.
Central to OFHEO’s consideration was
assuring clarity in the process of
calculating loan limits, providing for
smooth market operations and affording
certainty to those involved in making
and securing mortgages-Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, mortgage originators, and
homebuyers.
The proposed guidances and the
guidance made final today elaborate on,
revise and supersede an existing
guidance—Supervisory Guidance
Conforming Loan Limit Calculations,
SG–04–01 (February 20, 2004) that
delineated OFHEO’s role in calculating
and announcing the conforming loan
limit. In 2006, after a decline in housing
price numbers, OFHEO announced that,
while the conforming loan level had
decreased, the resulting decline in the
limit would be deferred a year. OFHEO
also indicated it would revise and
update the existing guidance and
address how the decline would be
implemented. OFHEO sought comment
on all aspects of the guidance, noting
certain key provisions addressing (1)
whether and how existing conforming
loans should be grandfathered; (2) a
number of procedural matters, including
rounding down announced loan limits
to the nearest $100; and (3) needed
clarity on treatment of declines in the
conforming loan limit. As proposed, the
calculated declines of less than one or,
alternatively, three percent in the loan
limit (currently $417,000) would be
deferred. Once cumulative deferrals
reached one or, alternatively, three
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:00 Mar 28, 2008
Jkt 214001
percent, then the total decline would be
subtracted one year later from the
calculated conforming loan limit after
adjusting for any subsequent price
increase that had occurred. Additional
information on OFHEO’s original and
revised guidance proposals remain on
OFHEO’s Web site.
B. Comments Received. OFHEO
received comments from seven
commentators to its Revised Draft
Examination Guidance for calculating
the conforming loan limit (CLL),
proposed on October 22, 2007. Four
housing and mortgage industry trade
associations commented, specifically,
the National Association of Realtors
(NAR), the Mortgage Bankers
Association of America (MBA), the
National Association of Homebuilders
(NAHB), and a joint comment letter
from the American Bankers Association
and America’s Community Bankers
(ABA/ACB). Jeff Butchko, a private
citizen, submitted a comment letter.
Both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae
submitted comment letters.
1. Industry Trade Associations. The
NAHB, the NAR, and the MBA
reiterated that OFHEO does not have
statutory power to reduce the
conforming loan limit. The NAHB,
NAR, and the MBA asserted that the
draft guidance was bad public policy
and introduced a complicated
calculation method that would distort
markets. Additionally, both the MBA
and NAHB repeated concerns that the
proposed guidance was a regulation
under the Administrative Procedure Act
and it must be issued in accordance
with the requirements of that Act,
whereby the APA promulgation would
be subject to judicial review. Central to
their argument was that, for operational
and other reasons, the conforming loan
limit should not decline.
The MBA requested further expansion
of the ‘‘grandfathering’’ provision due to
a decline in the loan limit postcommitment but prior to closing. The
NAR, however, stated that despite their
statutory authority and public policy
concerns, they would support the 3
percent de minimis threshold, the
deferral of reductions for at least one
year, and the grandfathering of
mortgages approved under higher
conforming loan limits. Both the MBA
and NAHB resubmitted their previous
comment letters to support their
criticism of the draft Guidance.
The ABA/ACB, in a joint comment,
expressed support of OFHEO’s proposed
guidance. They stated that the revised
guidance addressed their general
concern on ‘‘grandfathering’’ issues, and
they welcomed the de minimis change
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
from one percent to three percent in the
revised guidance.
Mr. Jeff Butchko’s comment letter (email) stated that the conforming loan
limit is too low for many areas of the
country and requested that OFHEO raise
this limit.
2. Enterprise Comments. Fannie Mae
offered comments on the grandfather
rule, questioning whether language in
the draft guidance grandfathering loans
that were conforming at origination
matched the language in the preamble.
They expressed a concern that this
difference in language could be
disruptive to the market. Fannie Mae
further argued that the mechanism to
provide for decreases in the conforming
loan limit had no long-term significance
and ‘‘potential harmful’’ short-term
effects. They stated that the ‘‘question
for OFHEO may be not whether it has
statutory authority to enforce a ‘negative
increase’ in the CLL but whether the
statute requires this result; not whether
it can reduce the CLL temporarily but
whether it should.’’
Freddie Mac had specific comments
to multiple elements of the revised
guidance. Freddie Mac recommended
that any decrease in the MIRS should be
offset against future increases, rather
than reducing the CLL. If OFHEO
decided to require a de minimis
threshold for a decrease, the proposed
three percent threshold should be raised
to five percent. Like Fannie Mae,
Freddie Mac recommended that the
grandfathering language in the preamble
be adopted in the body of the guidance.
Finally, Freddie Mac recommended
removing the rounding provision
altogether. If OFHEO chose to retain the
rounding provision, Freddie requested
that OFHEO retain its current practice of
rounding down to the nearest $50.
The final examination guidance on
conforming loan limit calculations,
which OFHEO has determined to revise
and issue, is set forth below.
OFHEO
Office of Federal Housing Enterprise
Oversight
Examination Guidance
Issuance Date: March 31, 2008. Doc. #:
EG–08–001
Subject: Conforming Loan Limit
Calculations
To: OFHEO Examiners
OFHEO Associate Directors
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
a. Scope
b. Preservation of Existing Authority
II. Calculation of Conforming Loan Limit
a. General Procedures
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
31MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 62 / Monday, March 31, 2008 / Notices
b. Procedures for Years in Which Limit
Declines
c. Procedures for Adjustments and
Technical Changes
References
a. Supervisory Guidance SG–04–001
b. Federal Housing Enterprises Financial
Safety and Soundness Act
c. OFHEO Regulations Safety and
Soundness Standards, 12 CFR part 1720
& Prompt Supervisory Response &
Corrective Act, 12 CFR part 1777.
I. Introduction
a. Scope
This guidance addresses the annual
establishment of the conforming loan
limit amount for mortgages purchased
by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (‘‘the
Enterprises’’) and OFHEO supervisory
procedures related to such activity.
This guidance replaces Supervisory
Guidance SG–04–01.
mmaher on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
(1) OFHEO Supervisory Authority
OFHEO oversees two housing
government sponsored enterprises—
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—to assure
they operate in a safe and sound manner
and maintain adequate capital; 12
U.S.C. 4501, 4511, 4513. OFHEO’s
responsibilities include avoiding
situations that would present safety and
soundness problems; 12 CFR part 1720,
Appendices A and B and 12 CFR part
1777. In addressing areas where such
problems could arise, OFHEO has
highlighted corporate governance and
financial disclosures; 12 CFR parts 1730
and 1710. In its regulation on
disclosure, OFHEO noted key areas of
concern—access to markets and
potential damages to the firms from
incurring reputation risk. Therefore,
OFHEO has set forth this guidance to
ensure that the conforming loan limit is
established in a manner consistent with
safe and sound operations and with
statutory requirements.
For twenty-five years of practice, the
Enterprises announced a conforming
loan limit. However, in seven of those
years adjustments or decisions were
made that raised safety and soundness
concerns about the annual adjustment to
the conforming loan limit. OFHEO
believes that the situation may be
addressed through appropriate
guidance, setting a more regularized
process of oversight and control for this
matter of national significance. That is
the intent of this guidance.
(2) Conforming Loan Limit (CLL)
The Enterprises are authorized by
their charters to purchase mortgages up
to a specified limit as adjusted annually;
12 U.S.C. 302(b)(2) and 305(a)(2). This
limit is referred to as the conforming
loan limit (CLL).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:00 Mar 28, 2008
Jkt 214001
The Enterprises make this adjustment
based on a survey conducted by the
Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB).
The FHFB monthly conducts and
publishes the results of a survey of
mortgage interest rates, the Monthly
Interest Rate Survey (MIRS). Under the
Enterprise charters, the change in the
national average one-family house price
during the twelve-month period ending
with the previous October as
determined by the FHFB in its survey is
the basis for changes to the conforming
loan limit. The Enterprises apply the
percentage change to the current year’s
conforming loan limit to establish the
next year’s limit. This number
constitutes part of the determinations of
the eligibility of loans for Enterprise
purchases.
OFHEO as safety and soundness
regulator has responsibility to oversee
safe and sound operations and may act
to redress violations of law by the
Enterprises. In the case of the
conforming loan limits, OFHEO
determined in 2004, following a
problem in technical matters relating to
the limits, that a more formalized
process for establishing the conforming
loan limit was needed.
(3) Background to Conforming Loan
Limit Determinations
Since 1981, the Enterprises have
adjusted the conforming loan limit as
allowed under the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1980.
During this time frame, two types of
occurrences have transpired that raise
the need for a more formal process: (1)
The Enterprises on some occasions
adjusted their loan limits in a manner
that was different from the survey
results and (2) the Federal Housing
Finance Board has made technical
changes to its methodology for
determining housing prices that the
Enterprises have not reflected in their
adjustments.
On three occasions prior to 2006, the
average house price declined from
October to October (in 1989, 1993, and
1994). In November 1989, the
Enterprises reduced the 1990
conforming loan limit by $150 from the
1989 level based on a house price
decline of 0.07 percent. In November
1993 and November 1994, however, the
Enterprises announced that the
conforming loan limit would remain
constant at $203,150, despite declines in
house prices of 2.96 percent in 1993 and
1.46 percent in 1994. After housing
prices increased from October 1994 to
October 1995, the Enterprises raised the
limit for 1996 without any adjustment
for the previous declines.
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16897
Additionally, in November 1997, the
Enterprises took another course, setting
a lower number than the adjustment
produced. They determined that the
1998 conforming loan limit would
increase by only 3.67 percent, even
though the percentage change in house
prices using FHFB data for 1996–1997
was 8.44 percent. The practical effect of
this action was to adjust retroactively
for the 1993 and 1994 price declines.
There have been three occasions—in
1992, 1998 and 2003—when the Federal
Housing Finance Board made
methodological changes to the Monthly
Mortgage Interest Rate Survey that
required an adjustment to one or both of
the reference years, that is, the prior or
current year’s October calculation (in
1992, 1998, and 2003). In December
1992, the Enterprises determined that
the 1993 conforming loan limit would
increase 0.42 percent based on adjusted
FHFB numbers for October 1991 and
October 1992 national average onefamily house price. In November 1998,
the Enterprises determined that the
1999 conforming mortgage loan limit
would increase by 5.66 percent based on
an adjusted October 1997 house price
survey. Therefore, in 1992 and again in
1998, the Enterprises used the adjusted
national average one-family house
price(s) provided by the FHFB.
In 2003, however, the Enterprises
adopted a conforming loan limit that
disregarded communications from the
FHFB staff regarding a change in the
methodology for estimating house
prices. The Enterprises determined that
the 2004 conforming loan limit would
increase by 3.41 percent based on
unadjusted national average house
prices for October 2002 and October
2003. However, FHFB staff had
indicated that the October 2003 national
average house price should be adjusted
downward by $1,647, resulting in a net
increase of 2.71 percent.
Due to this inconsistent application of
procedures for price declines and
methodology changes, OFHEO issued a
conforming loan limit guidance in 2004.
To clarify elements of the existing
guidance and to address the concerns
around possible declines in the national
average house price average, OFHEO
announced in late 2006 that it would
issue a new guidance to replace the
2004 issuance.
In 2006, the October national house
price average declined by 0.16 percent
from the previous October, which by the
standard calculation would have
reduced the maximum single family
conforming loan limit from $417,000 to
$416,300. OFHEO had previously
indicated, however, that the effect of
any decrease in the house price average
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
31MRN1
16898
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 62 / Monday, March 31, 2008 / Notices
would be deferred until the Fall 2007
calculation of the limits for the
following year. OFHEO also stated that
for the 2008 calculation, the decrease of
0.16 percent would be deducted from
any increase in the average house price
in the year ended October 2007 or, if the
average price decreased, the loan limit
would decrease by that 0.16 percent
amount. OFHEO subsequently
announced that in line with its
approach in proposed guidances, the
conforming loan limit would not
decrease in 2008. Left to be determined
was how a further decline in 2008, if it
occurred, would be treated and whether
any existing loans would be
grandfathered. The purpose of this
guidance, which was subject to public
notice and comment on two occasions is
to address these and related issues.
b. Preservation of Existing Authority
Nothing contained in this guidance
prevents OFHEO from undertaking such
supervisory or enforcement actions as
may be necessary to meet its statutory
obligations to oversee maintenance of
safety and soundness and adequate
capital.
II. Calculation of Conforming Loan
Limit
mmaher on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
a. General Procedures
(i) Consistent with statute, OFHEO
will utilize the Federal Housing Finance
Board’s annual October-to-October
Monthly Interest Rate Survey (MIRS)
data (routinely released in November) to
calculate the conforming loan limit for
the following calendar year.
(ii) Under the terms of an inter-agency
agreement, the FHFB will provide
OFHEO with the confidential October
survey data prior to its public release.
(iii) OFHEO will calculate the
percentage change in the average house
price, make any adjustment needed to
reflect FHFB methodological changes
and determine the new maximum
conforming loan limit for the following
year. The result of the calculation will
be rounded downward, in line with
existing practice, to the nearest $100, for
marketplace convenience and
administrative simplicity.
(iv) Immediately following the FHFB’s
October MIRS announcement, OFHEO
will announce the maximum level of the
new conforming loan limit and
simultaneously issue a letter with its
determination to each Enterprise.
(v) Each Enterprise under its charter
then determines whether to set the
conforming loan limit at its institution
at or below that level.
(vi) The purchase of any mortgage
above the limit by Fannie Mae or
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:00 Mar 28, 2008
Jkt 214001
Freddie Mac will be considered an
unsafe and unsound practice, running
contrary to statute.
b. Procedures for Years in Which the
House Price Level Declines
(i) If the October MIRS survey data
indicate a decline from the previous
October, no decrease in the loan limit
for the next year will be required.
(ii) The next increase in the
conforming loan limit will take into
account prior decline(s) in the MIRS so
that an increase in the loan limit will
reflect the net change in the MIRS
average price since the last loan limit
increase. Declines will be accumulated
and then reduce increases until
increases exceed such prior declines.
c. Procedures for Adjustments and
Technical Changes
(i) At any time during the year after
a calculation has been made and the
conforming loan limit set, if the FHFB
revises the MIRS or any calculation, the
Enterprises may provide comments to
the FHFB for its consideration. Copies
of any Enterprise comments should be
provided contemporaneously to
OFHEO.
(ii) Once the FHFB has determined
the nature, scope and timing of
technical changes or adjustments,
OFHEO will make adjustments to the
next year’s conforming loan limit based
upon the procedures set forth in this
Guidance.
III. Changes to the Conforming Loan
Limit Guidance
After careful consideration of
comments received and seeking to meet
the goals of clarity, ease of
implementation, providing market
certainty and in light of the temporary
increase in the conforming loan limit
contained in the Recovery Rebates and
Economic Stimulus for the American
People Act of 2008, OFHEO has revised
and is issuing a final Examination
Guidance—Conforming Loan Limit
Calculations. Regarding the central topic
of most comments and for which
differing comments were received,
OFHEO has determined that any
October-to-October decrease in the
national average house price, as
reported by the Federal Housing
Finance Board’s MIRS, will not require
a decrease in the loan limit but will be
charged against the next increase or
increases, as necessary. Any percentage
increase in the loan limit will not
exceed the net percentage increase in
the MIRS average price since October of
the year preceding the last increase in
the loan limit. In sum, the loan limit
will not decline from the present
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
$417,000 level; however, calculated
decreases will be accumulated and
offset increases until all of the
accumulated amounts have been offset.
This will ensure that the conforming
loan limit remains, as contemplated, a
measure tied to housing prices. Over
time, both increases and decreases will
be reflected in the limit. This also
means that the de minimis and
grandfathering proposals are no longer
relevant.
Other elements of the draft guidance
have been adopted as proposed. OFHEO
reconsidered whether it should round
the maximum permitted loan limit to
the nearest $100, as proposed, or
whether it should retain the current
practice of rounding to the nearest $50.
In view of the quadrupling of house
prices generally since adoption of the
$50 figure, OFHEO determined to adopt
the $100 rounding factor as proposed.
Below is a summary of key provisions
and additions or deletions made in the
guidance issued today.
A. Loan Limit Declines and Statute
Some comments received agreed with
OFHEO’s determination to address
declines in home price levels, while
others disagreed. OFHEO’s view
remains the same—that declines fit
within the statutory language as
‘‘negative increases.’’ In the alternative,
where statutory language is silent, as is
the case here, regulators routinely fill
gaps in statutes with rational solutions
in line with available statutory intent.
Since loan limit calculations are tied to
annual home price surveys, increases
and declines reasonably may be
considered in line with that statutory
structure.
B. Loan Limit Declines—Deferrals
In line with a streamlined approach
adopted herein, OFHEO has extended
the deferral period. Decreases will be
accumulated and then applied to the
next following increase in the loan
level. They are not deferred for a set
period but accumulated until an
increase occurs and are then applied to
offset increases until increases exceed
accumulated decreases.
C. Loan Limit Declines—De Minimis
Declines
In line with a streamlined approach
adopted herein, OFHEO has dropped
language regarding de minimis declines.
Since the conforming loan limit does
not decline, but rather increases in the
limit may be reduced by prior declines,
there are no operational concerns, as
were identified in the comment period,
regarding offsetting increases with
reductions or not making increases
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
31MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 62 / Monday, March 31, 2008 / Notices
where deferred amounts offset any
increase.
D. Grandfathering Issues
In line with the streamlined approach
adopted herein, OFHEO has dropped
language on grandfathering. Since the
conforming loan limit does not decline,
no concerns exist about loans made
prior to a decline in the loan limit.
E. Rounding Down
Comments received regarding a
rounding down to the lowest $100 as
opposed to the current OFHEO practice
of rounding down to the lowest $50
were mixed with some opposing and
others indicating either no objection to
or no opinion on OFHEO’s proposal.
The final guidance adopts the approach
of rounding down to the nearest $100 as
having value as to market and consumer
simplicity and understanding. Also, it
would represent a doubling of this
rounding standard, a much smaller
percentage change than the four-fold
increase in the loan limits since the $50
standard was adopted.
Accordingly, as stated in the
Preamble, OFHEO hereby publishes the
text of its Final Examination Guidance
on Conforming Loan Limit Calculations.
Dated: March 25, 2008.
James B. Lockhart, III,
Director, Office of Federal Housing Enterprise
Oversight.
[FR Doc. E8–6560 Filed 3–28–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4220–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Geological Survey
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Submitted for Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
Review; Comment Request
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of an extension of an
information collection (1028–0078).
mmaher on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: To comply with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), we are notifying the public that
we have submitted to OMB an
information collection request (ICR) to
renew approval of the paperwork
requirements for ‘‘North American
Amphibian Monitoring Program.’’ This
notice also provides the public a second
opportunity to comment on the
paperwork burden of this form.
DATES: Submit written comments by
April 30, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Please submit comments on
this information collection directly to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:00 Mar 28, 2008
Jkt 214001
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk
Officer for the Department of the
Interior via OMB e-mail:
(OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov); or by
fax (202) 395–6566; and identify your
submission with #1028–0078.
Please also submit a copy of your
comments to the Department of the
Interior, USGS, via:
• E-mail: atravnic@usgs.gov. Use
Information Collection Number 1028–
0078 in the subject line.
• FAX: (703) 648–7069. Use
Information Collection Number 1028–
0078 in the subject line.
• Mail or hand-carry comments to the
Department of the Interior; USGS
Clearance Officer, U.S. Geological
Survey, 807 National Center, Reston, VA
20192. Please reference Information
Collection 1028–0078 in your
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Linda Weir at (301) 497–5932. Copies of
the full Information Collection Request
and the forms can be obtained at no cost
at https://www.reginfo.gov or by
contacting the USGS clearance officer at
the phone number listed below.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: North American Amphibian
Monitoring Program (NAAMP).
OMB Control Number: 1028–0078.
Abstract: The North American
Amphibian Monitoring Program
(NAAMP) is a long-term, large-scale
anuran monitoring program to track the
status and trends of eastern and central
North American frogs and toads.
Volunteers conduct calling surveys
three times per year, depending on the
regional species assemblage. Volunteers
listen for 5 minutes at 10 stops along the
route. Data are submitted electronically
via the Internet or on hard copy. These
data will be used to estimate population
trends at various geographic scales and
assist with documenting species
distribution.
Frequency: 3 times per year.
Estimated Number and Description of
Respondents: Approximately 500
volunteer respondents per year.
Estimated Number of Responses:
1,500.
Annual burden hours: 4,500 hours.
Estimated Annual Reporting and
Recordkeeping ‘‘Hour’’ Burden: We
estimate the public reporting burden
averages 3 hours per response. This
includes the time for driving to/from the
survey route locations, 5-minute
listening period per sampling station (10
sampling stations per route) and data
entry time to submit data to the NAAMP
Web site.
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16899
Estimated Reporting and
Recordkeeping ‘‘Non-Hour Cost’’
Burden: We estimate the total ‘‘nonhour’’ cost burden to be $11,500. This
total includes a one-time cost per
respondent for the purchase of a
thermometer to record air temperature
during the survey, plus the operational
costs of mileage for conducting the
surveys.
Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA
(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and
you are not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. Until OMB approves a
collection of information, you are not
obligated to respond.
Comments: Before submitting an ICR
to OMB, PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A) (44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) requires each
agency ‘‘* * * to provide notice * * *
and otherwise consult with members of
the public and affected agencies
concerning each proposed collection of
information * * *’’ Agencies must
specifically solicit comments to: (a)
Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the agency to perform its duties,
including whether the information is
useful; (b) evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
enhance the quality, usefulness, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) minimize the burden
on the respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
To comply with the public
consultation process, on January 25,
2008, we published a Federal Register
notice (73 FR 4620) announcing that we
would submit this ICR to OMB for
approval. The notice provided the
required 60-day public comment period.
We have received two comments in
support of the survey. The comments
had no effect on the burden.
USGS Information Collection
Clearance Officer: Alfred Travnicek,
703–648–7231.
Dated: March 17, 2008.
Susan D. Haseltine,
Associate Director for Biology.
[FR Doc. E8–6612 Filed 3–28–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4311–AM–P
E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM
31MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 62 (Monday, March 31, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16895-16899]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-6560]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight
Examination Guidance
AGENCY: Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, HUD.
ACTION: Notice of Final Examination Guidance--Conforming Loan Limit
Calculations; Response to Comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight is
publishing today an Examination Guidance, ``Conforming Loan Limit
Calculations,'' following two requests for public comment on a proposed
examination guidance. Material in the guidance does not constitute a
regulation.
DATES: March 31, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have any questions regarding
OFHEO's Examination Guidance--Conforming Loan Limit Calculations, you
may contact Alfred M. Pollard, General Counsel, at (202) 414-3800 (not
a toll free number). The telephone number for the Telecommunications
Device for the Deaf is: (800) 877-8339 (TDD Only).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OFHEO's Examination Guidance on Conforming
Loan Limit Calculations is posted on the Internet at https://
www.ofheo.gov. This document, as well as all others mentioned in the
preamble can also be accessed on business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m., at the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight,
Fourth Floor, 1700 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20552. To make an
appointment to inspect documents, please call the Office of General
Counsel at (202) 414-6924.
I. Background and Statement on the Conforming Loan Limit for 2008
On November 15, 2006, OFHEO announced that any decline in the house
price index used to establish the conforming loan limit would not
result in a decline in that limit for 2007. OFHEO also committed at
that time, to providing updated guidance on how future reductions in
the relevant house price index would affect the conforming loan limit.
On June 20, 2007, OFHEO released on its Web site for public
comment, a proposed revision to its existing Examination Guidance
entitled ``Conforming Loan Limit Calculations'' (the original
proposal). Subsequently, on October 22, 2007, OFHEO published in the
Federal Register for public comment a revised version of that
[[Page 16896]]
proposed guidance (the revised proposal). Today, OFHEO is issuing the
final Examination Guidance.
II. Comments Received on revised Examination Guidance--Conforming Loan
Limit Calculations
Calculations for the conforming loan limit establish the maximum
size of loans that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may purchase, as provided
in their charters. The conforming loan limit is adjusted annually
through a calculation of year over year changes to the existing level
of home prices based on data from the Federal Housing Finance Board's
Monthly Interest Rate Survey (MIRS).
A. Guidance Proposals. OFHEO provided for public comment on the
proposed examination guidance through OFHEO's Web site on June 20,
2007, and at the end of a thirty day comment period, some 23 comments
from 25 organizations (representing over 2 million individuals and
businesses) and individual comments were received. OFHEO took these
comments into consideration, altered its proposed draft guidance and
reissued it for further public comment on October 22, 2007. Central to
OFHEO's consideration was assuring clarity in the process of
calculating loan limits, providing for smooth market operations and
affording certainty to those involved in making and securing mortgages-
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, mortgage originators, and homebuyers.
The proposed guidances and the guidance made final today elaborate
on, revise and supersede an existing guidance--Supervisory Guidance
Conforming Loan Limit Calculations, SG-04-01 (February 20, 2004) that
delineated OFHEO's role in calculating and announcing the conforming
loan limit. In 2006, after a decline in housing price numbers, OFHEO
announced that, while the conforming loan level had decreased, the
resulting decline in the limit would be deferred a year. OFHEO also
indicated it would revise and update the existing guidance and address
how the decline would be implemented. OFHEO sought comment on all
aspects of the guidance, noting certain key provisions addressing (1)
whether and how existing conforming loans should be grandfathered; (2)
a number of procedural matters, including rounding down announced loan
limits to the nearest $100; and (3) needed clarity on treatment of
declines in the conforming loan limit. As proposed, the calculated
declines of less than one or, alternatively, three percent in the loan
limit (currently $417,000) would be deferred. Once cumulative deferrals
reached one or, alternatively, three percent, then the total decline
would be subtracted one year later from the calculated conforming loan
limit after adjusting for any subsequent price increase that had
occurred. Additional information on OFHEO's original and revised
guidance proposals remain on OFHEO's Web site.
B. Comments Received. OFHEO received comments from seven
commentators to its Revised Draft Examination Guidance for calculating
the conforming loan limit (CLL), proposed on October 22, 2007. Four
housing and mortgage industry trade associations commented,
specifically, the National Association of Realtors (NAR), the Mortgage
Bankers Association of America (MBA), the National Association of
Homebuilders (NAHB), and a joint comment letter from the American
Bankers Association and America's Community Bankers (ABA/ACB). Jeff
Butchko, a private citizen, submitted a comment letter. Both Freddie
Mac and Fannie Mae submitted comment letters.
1. Industry Trade Associations. The NAHB, the NAR, and the MBA
reiterated that OFHEO does not have statutory power to reduce the
conforming loan limit. The NAHB, NAR, and the MBA asserted that the
draft guidance was bad public policy and introduced a complicated
calculation method that would distort markets. Additionally, both the
MBA and NAHB repeated concerns that the proposed guidance was a
regulation under the Administrative Procedure Act and it must be issued
in accordance with the requirements of that Act, whereby the APA
promulgation would be subject to judicial review. Central to their
argument was that, for operational and other reasons, the conforming
loan limit should not decline.
The MBA requested further expansion of the ``grandfathering''
provision due to a decline in the loan limit post-commitment but prior
to closing. The NAR, however, stated that despite their statutory
authority and public policy concerns, they would support the 3 percent
de minimis threshold, the deferral of reductions for at least one year,
and the grandfathering of mortgages approved under higher conforming
loan limits. Both the MBA and NAHB resubmitted their previous comment
letters to support their criticism of the draft Guidance.
The ABA/ACB, in a joint comment, expressed support of OFHEO's
proposed guidance. They stated that the revised guidance addressed
their general concern on ``grandfathering'' issues, and they welcomed
the de minimis change from one percent to three percent in the revised
guidance.
Mr. Jeff Butchko's comment letter (e-mail) stated that the
conforming loan limit is too low for many areas of the country and
requested that OFHEO raise this limit.
2. Enterprise Comments. Fannie Mae offered comments on the
grandfather rule, questioning whether language in the draft guidance
grandfathering loans that were conforming at origination matched the
language in the preamble. They expressed a concern that this difference
in language could be disruptive to the market. Fannie Mae further
argued that the mechanism to provide for decreases in the conforming
loan limit had no long-term significance and ``potential harmful''
short-term effects. They stated that the ``question for OFHEO may be
not whether it has statutory authority to enforce a `negative increase'
in the CLL but whether the statute requires this result; not whether it
can reduce the CLL temporarily but whether it should.''
Freddie Mac had specific comments to multiple elements of the
revised guidance. Freddie Mac recommended that any decrease in the MIRS
should be offset against future increases, rather than reducing the
CLL. If OFHEO decided to require a de minimis threshold for a decrease,
the proposed three percent threshold should be raised to five percent.
Like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac recommended that the grandfathering
language in the preamble be adopted in the body of the guidance.
Finally, Freddie Mac recommended removing the rounding provision
altogether. If OFHEO chose to retain the rounding provision, Freddie
requested that OFHEO retain its current practice of rounding down to
the nearest $50.
The final examination guidance on conforming loan limit
calculations, which OFHEO has determined to revise and issue, is set
forth below.
OFHEO
Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight
Examination Guidance
Issuance Date: March 31, 2008. Doc. : EG-08-001
Subject: Conforming Loan Limit Calculations
To: OFHEO Examiners
OFHEO Associate Directors
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
a. Scope
b. Preservation of Existing Authority
II. Calculation of Conforming Loan Limit
a. General Procedures
[[Page 16897]]
b. Procedures for Years in Which Limit Declines
c. Procedures for Adjustments and Technical Changes
References
a. Supervisory Guidance SG-04-001
b. Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness
Act
c. OFHEO Regulations Safety and Soundness Standards, 12 CFR part
1720 & Prompt Supervisory Response & Corrective Act, 12 CFR part
1777.
I. Introduction
a. Scope
This guidance addresses the annual establishment of the conforming
loan limit amount for mortgages purchased by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
(``the Enterprises'') and OFHEO supervisory procedures related to such
activity.
This guidance replaces Supervisory Guidance SG-04-01.
(1) OFHEO Supervisory Authority
OFHEO oversees two housing government sponsored enterprises--
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--to assure they operate in a safe and sound
manner and maintain adequate capital; 12 U.S.C. 4501, 4511, 4513.
OFHEO's responsibilities include avoiding situations that would present
safety and soundness problems; 12 CFR part 1720, Appendices A and B and
12 CFR part 1777. In addressing areas where such problems could arise,
OFHEO has highlighted corporate governance and financial disclosures;
12 CFR parts 1730 and 1710. In its regulation on disclosure, OFHEO
noted key areas of concern--access to markets and potential damages to
the firms from incurring reputation risk. Therefore, OFHEO has set
forth this guidance to ensure that the conforming loan limit is
established in a manner consistent with safe and sound operations and
with statutory requirements.
For twenty-five years of practice, the Enterprises announced a
conforming loan limit. However, in seven of those years adjustments or
decisions were made that raised safety and soundness concerns about the
annual adjustment to the conforming loan limit. OFHEO believes that the
situation may be addressed through appropriate guidance, setting a more
regularized process of oversight and control for this matter of
national significance. That is the intent of this guidance.
(2) Conforming Loan Limit (CLL)
The Enterprises are authorized by their charters to purchase
mortgages up to a specified limit as adjusted annually; 12 U.S.C.
302(b)(2) and 305(a)(2). This limit is referred to as the conforming
loan limit (CLL).
The Enterprises make this adjustment based on a survey conducted by
the Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB). The FHFB monthly conducts and
publishes the results of a survey of mortgage interest rates, the
Monthly Interest Rate Survey (MIRS). Under the Enterprise charters, the
change in the national average one-family house price during the
twelve-month period ending with the previous October as determined by
the FHFB in its survey is the basis for changes to the conforming loan
limit. The Enterprises apply the percentage change to the current
year's conforming loan limit to establish the next year's limit. This
number constitutes part of the determinations of the eligibility of
loans for Enterprise purchases.
OFHEO as safety and soundness regulator has responsibility to
oversee safe and sound operations and may act to redress violations of
law by the Enterprises. In the case of the conforming loan limits,
OFHEO determined in 2004, following a problem in technical matters
relating to the limits, that a more formalized process for establishing
the conforming loan limit was needed.
(3) Background to Conforming Loan Limit Determinations
Since 1981, the Enterprises have adjusted the conforming loan limit
as allowed under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980.
During this time frame, two types of occurrences have transpired that
raise the need for a more formal process: (1) The Enterprises on some
occasions adjusted their loan limits in a manner that was different
from the survey results and (2) the Federal Housing Finance Board has
made technical changes to its methodology for determining housing
prices that the Enterprises have not reflected in their adjustments.
On three occasions prior to 2006, the average house price declined
from October to October (in 1989, 1993, and 1994). In November 1989,
the Enterprises reduced the 1990 conforming loan limit by $150 from the
1989 level based on a house price decline of 0.07 percent. In November
1993 and November 1994, however, the Enterprises announced that the
conforming loan limit would remain constant at $203,150, despite
declines in house prices of 2.96 percent in 1993 and 1.46 percent in
1994. After housing prices increased from October 1994 to October 1995,
the Enterprises raised the limit for 1996 without any adjustment for
the previous declines.
Additionally, in November 1997, the Enterprises took another
course, setting a lower number than the adjustment produced. They
determined that the 1998 conforming loan limit would increase by only
3.67 percent, even though the percentage change in house prices using
FHFB data for 1996-1997 was 8.44 percent. The practical effect of this
action was to adjust retroactively for the 1993 and 1994 price
declines.
There have been three occasions--in 1992, 1998 and 2003--when the
Federal Housing Finance Board made methodological changes to the
Monthly Mortgage Interest Rate Survey that required an adjustment to
one or both of the reference years, that is, the prior or current
year's October calculation (in 1992, 1998, and 2003). In December 1992,
the Enterprises determined that the 1993 conforming loan limit would
increase 0.42 percent based on adjusted FHFB numbers for October 1991
and October 1992 national average one-family house price. In November
1998, the Enterprises determined that the 1999 conforming mortgage loan
limit would increase by 5.66 percent based on an adjusted October 1997
house price survey. Therefore, in 1992 and again in 1998, the
Enterprises used the adjusted national average one-family house
price(s) provided by the FHFB.
In 2003, however, the Enterprises adopted a conforming loan limit
that disregarded communications from the FHFB staff regarding a change
in the methodology for estimating house prices. The Enterprises
determined that the 2004 conforming loan limit would increase by 3.41
percent based on unadjusted national average house prices for October
2002 and October 2003. However, FHFB staff had indicated that the
October 2003 national average house price should be adjusted downward
by $1,647, resulting in a net increase of 2.71 percent.
Due to this inconsistent application of procedures for price
declines and methodology changes, OFHEO issued a conforming loan limit
guidance in 2004. To clarify elements of the existing guidance and to
address the concerns around possible declines in the national average
house price average, OFHEO announced in late 2006 that it would issue a
new guidance to replace the 2004 issuance.
In 2006, the October national house price average declined by 0.16
percent from the previous October, which by the standard calculation
would have reduced the maximum single family conforming loan limit from
$417,000 to $416,300. OFHEO had previously indicated, however, that the
effect of any decrease in the house price average
[[Page 16898]]
would be deferred until the Fall 2007 calculation of the limits for the
following year. OFHEO also stated that for the 2008 calculation, the
decrease of 0.16 percent would be deducted from any increase in the
average house price in the year ended October 2007 or, if the average
price decreased, the loan limit would decrease by that 0.16 percent
amount. OFHEO subsequently announced that in line with its approach in
proposed guidances, the conforming loan limit would not decrease in
2008. Left to be determined was how a further decline in 2008, if it
occurred, would be treated and whether any existing loans would be
grandfathered. The purpose of this guidance, which was subject to
public notice and comment on two occasions is to address these and
related issues.
b. Preservation of Existing Authority
Nothing contained in this guidance prevents OFHEO from undertaking
such supervisory or enforcement actions as may be necessary to meet its
statutory obligations to oversee maintenance of safety and soundness
and adequate capital.
II. Calculation of Conforming Loan Limit
a. General Procedures
(i) Consistent with statute, OFHEO will utilize the Federal Housing
Finance Board's annual October-to-October Monthly Interest Rate Survey
(MIRS) data (routinely released in November) to calculate the
conforming loan limit for the following calendar year.
(ii) Under the terms of an inter-agency agreement, the FHFB will
provide OFHEO with the confidential October survey data prior to its
public release.
(iii) OFHEO will calculate the percentage change in the average
house price, make any adjustment needed to reflect FHFB methodological
changes and determine the new maximum conforming loan limit for the
following year. The result of the calculation will be rounded downward,
in line with existing practice, to the nearest $100, for marketplace
convenience and administrative simplicity.
(iv) Immediately following the FHFB's October MIRS announcement,
OFHEO will announce the maximum level of the new conforming loan limit
and simultaneously issue a letter with its determination to each
Enterprise.
(v) Each Enterprise under its charter then determines whether to
set the conforming loan limit at its institution at or below that
level.
(vi) The purchase of any mortgage above the limit by Fannie Mae or
Freddie Mac will be considered an unsafe and unsound practice, running
contrary to statute.
b. Procedures for Years in Which the House Price Level Declines
(i) If the October MIRS survey data indicate a decline from the
previous October, no decrease in the loan limit for the next year will
be required.
(ii) The next increase in the conforming loan limit will take into
account prior decline(s) in the MIRS so that an increase in the loan
limit will reflect the net change in the MIRS average price since the
last loan limit increase. Declines will be accumulated and then reduce
increases until increases exceed such prior declines.
c. Procedures for Adjustments and Technical Changes
(i) At any time during the year after a calculation has been made
and the conforming loan limit set, if the FHFB revises the MIRS or any
calculation, the Enterprises may provide comments to the FHFB for its
consideration. Copies of any Enterprise comments should be provided
contemporaneously to OFHEO.
(ii) Once the FHFB has determined the nature, scope and timing of
technical changes or adjustments, OFHEO will make adjustments to the
next year's conforming loan limit based upon the procedures set forth
in this Guidance.
III. Changes to the Conforming Loan Limit Guidance
After careful consideration of comments received and seeking to
meet the goals of clarity, ease of implementation, providing market
certainty and in light of the temporary increase in the conforming loan
limit contained in the Recovery Rebates and Economic Stimulus for the
American People Act of 2008, OFHEO has revised and is issuing a final
Examination Guidance--Conforming Loan Limit Calculations. Regarding the
central topic of most comments and for which differing comments were
received, OFHEO has determined that any October-to-October decrease in
the national average house price, as reported by the Federal Housing
Finance Board's MIRS, will not require a decrease in the loan limit but
will be charged against the next increase or increases, as necessary.
Any percentage increase in the loan limit will not exceed the net
percentage increase in the MIRS average price since October of the year
preceding the last increase in the loan limit. In sum, the loan limit
will not decline from the present $417,000 level; however, calculated
decreases will be accumulated and offset increases until all of the
accumulated amounts have been offset. This will ensure that the
conforming loan limit remains, as contemplated, a measure tied to
housing prices. Over time, both increases and decreases will be
reflected in the limit. This also means that the de minimis and
grandfathering proposals are no longer relevant.
Other elements of the draft guidance have been adopted as proposed.
OFHEO reconsidered whether it should round the maximum permitted loan
limit to the nearest $100, as proposed, or whether it should retain the
current practice of rounding to the nearest $50. In view of the
quadrupling of house prices generally since adoption of the $50 figure,
OFHEO determined to adopt the $100 rounding factor as proposed. Below
is a summary of key provisions and additions or deletions made in the
guidance issued today.
A. Loan Limit Declines and Statute
Some comments received agreed with OFHEO's determination to address
declines in home price levels, while others disagreed. OFHEO's view
remains the same--that declines fit within the statutory language as
``negative increases.'' In the alternative, where statutory language is
silent, as is the case here, regulators routinely fill gaps in statutes
with rational solutions in line with available statutory intent. Since
loan limit calculations are tied to annual home price surveys,
increases and declines reasonably may be considered in line with that
statutory structure.
B. Loan Limit Declines--Deferrals
In line with a streamlined approach adopted herein, OFHEO has
extended the deferral period. Decreases will be accumulated and then
applied to the next following increase in the loan level. They are not
deferred for a set period but accumulated until an increase occurs and
are then applied to offset increases until increases exceed accumulated
decreases.
C. Loan Limit Declines--De Minimis Declines
In line with a streamlined approach adopted herein, OFHEO has
dropped language regarding de minimis declines. Since the conforming
loan limit does not decline, but rather increases in the limit may be
reduced by prior declines, there are no operational concerns, as were
identified in the comment period, regarding offsetting increases with
reductions or not making increases
[[Page 16899]]
where deferred amounts offset any increase.
D. Grandfathering Issues
In line with the streamlined approach adopted herein, OFHEO has
dropped language on grandfathering. Since the conforming loan limit
does not decline, no concerns exist about loans made prior to a decline
in the loan limit.
E. Rounding Down
Comments received regarding a rounding down to the lowest $100 as
opposed to the current OFHEO practice of rounding down to the lowest
$50 were mixed with some opposing and others indicating either no
objection to or no opinion on OFHEO's proposal. The final guidance
adopts the approach of rounding down to the nearest $100 as having
value as to market and consumer simplicity and understanding. Also, it
would represent a doubling of this rounding standard, a much smaller
percentage change than the four-fold increase in the loan limits since
the $50 standard was adopted.
Accordingly, as stated in the Preamble, OFHEO hereby publishes the
text of its Final Examination Guidance on Conforming Loan Limit
Calculations.
Dated: March 25, 2008.
James B. Lockhart, III,
Director, Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.
[FR Doc. E8-6560 Filed 3-28-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4220-01-P
