Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program, 31217-31220 [2011-13061]
Download as PDF
31217
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 76, No. 104
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
Classification
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
Executive Order 12988
This rule has been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. Except where specified, all
State and local laws and regulations that
are in direct conflict with this rule will
be preempted. Federal funds carry
Federal requirements. No person is
required to apply for funding under this
program, but if they do apply and are
selected for funding, they must comply
with the requirements applicable to the
Federal program funds. This rule is not
retroactive. It will not affect agreements
entered into prior to the effective date
of the rule. Before any judicial action
may be brought regarding the provisions
of this rule, the administrative appeal
provisions of 7 CFR part 11 must be
exhausted.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Rural Housing Service
Rural Business-Cooperative Service
Rural Utilities Service
Farm Service Agency
7 CFR Part 1980
RIN 0575–AC83
Single Family Housing Guaranteed
Loan Program
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Rural Housing Service, Rural
Business-Cooperative Service, Rural
Utilities Service, Farm Service Agency,
USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCIES:
This final rule implements
two changes in the regulations for the
Rural Housing Service (RHS) Section
502 Single Family Housing Guaranteed
Loan Program (SFHGLP) by eliminating
the lender’s published Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) rate for first
mortgage loans with no discount points
as an option for a maximum interest rate
on loans and by allowing the Secretary
to seek indemnification from the
originating lender if a loss is paid under
certain circumstances. This action is
taken to achieve savings for the
taxpayer, simplify regulations, and
promote efficiency in managing the
SFHGLP.
SUMMARY:
DATES:
Effective Date: August 1, 2011.
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with RULES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joaquin Tremols, Acting Director, Single
Family Housing Guaranteed Loan
Division, USDA Rural Development,
Room 2241, STOP 0784, 1400
Independence Ave., SW., Washington,
DC 20250, Telephone: (202) 720–1465,
E-mail: joaquin.tremols@wdc.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:21 May 27, 2011
Jkt 223001
This final rule has been determined to
be non-significant by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
Executive Order 12866.
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104–4, establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effect of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
and tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
the Agency generally must prepare a
written statement, including a costbenefit analysis, for proposed and final
rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
result in expenditures to State, local, or
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
to the private sector, of $100 million, or
more, in any one year. When such a
statement is needed for a rule, section
205 of the UMRA generally requires the
Agency to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives and adopt the least costly,
most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule.
This rule contains no Federal
mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for
State, local, and tribal governments or
the private sector. Therefore, this rule is
not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Environmental Impact Statement
This document has been reviewed in
accordance with 7 CFR part 1940,
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
subpart G, ‘‘Environmental Program.’’ It
is the determination of the Agency that
this action does not constitute a major
Federal action significantly affecting the
quality of the human environment, and,
in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq., neither an
Environmental Assessment nor an
Environmental Impact Statement is
required.
Federalism—Executive Order 13132
The policies contained in this rule do
not have any substantial direct effect on
States, on the relationship between the
national government and States, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Nor does this rule
impose substantial direct compliance
costs on State and local governments.
Therefore, consultation with the States
is not required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In compliance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) the
undersigned has determined and
certified by signature of this document
that this rule change will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This rule does
not impose any significant new
requirements on Agency applicants and
borrowers, and the regulatory changes
affect only Agency determination of
program benefits for guarantees of loans
made to individuals. Changes impacting
lenders will impact all approved lenders
doing business under this program.
There is no distinction made between
small and large lenders.
Intergovernmental Consultation
This program/activity is not subject to
the provisions of Executive Order
12372, which require intergovernmental
consultation with State and local
officials. (See the Notice related to 7
CFR part 3015, subpart V, at 48 FR
29112, June 24, 1983; 49 FR 22675, May
31, 1984; 50 FR 14088, April 10, 1985.)
Programs Affected
This program is listed in the Catalog
of Federal Domestic Assistance under
Number 10.410, Very Low to Moderate
Income Housing Loans (Section 502
Rural Housing Loans).
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
31218
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 104 / Tuesday, May 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection and record
keeping requirements contained in this
regulation have been approved by OMB
in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). The assigned OMB control
number is 0575–0078.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Rural Housing Service is
committed to complying with the EGovernment Act, to promote the use of
the Internet and other information
technologies to provide increased
opportunities for citizen access to
Government information and services,
and for other purposes.
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with RULES
Non-Discrimination Statement
The U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) prohibits discrimination in all
its programs and activities on the basis
of race, color, national origin, age,
disability, and where applicable, sex,
marital status, familial status, parental
status, religion, sexual orientation,
genetic information, political beliefs,
reprisal, or because all or part of an
individual’s income is derived from any
public assistance program. (Not all
prohibited bases apply to all programs.)
Persons with disabilities who require
alternative means for communication of
program information (Braille, large
print, audiotape, etc.) should contact
USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720–
2600 (voice and TDD). To file a
complaint of discrimination, write to
USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights,
1400 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20250–9410, or call
(800) 795–3272 (voice) or (202) 720–
6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal
opportunity provider, employer, and
lender.
Background
In the spring of 2009, the Inspector
General completed an audit of the
controls over lending activities in the
SFHGLP. The audit evaluated the
systems and processes to ensure that
lenders (1) submit accurate and
legitimate borrower eligibility data and
(2) set interest rates on loans within
Agency guidelines. The audit report
made a number of recommendations for
what the SFHGLP can do to streamline
operations, prevent fraud, and improve
efficiency in its mission. As a result of
the audit a proposed rule was published
in the Federal Register on May 19, 2010
(75 FR 27949).
Under the existing SFHGLP
regulation, lenders may set an interest
rate for a loan that does not exceed the
higher of the Lender’s published rate for
VA first mortgage loans with no
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:21 May 27, 2011
Jkt 223001
discount points or the current Federal
National Mortgage Association (Fannie
Mae) rate as defined in 7 CFR
1980.302(a), currently defined as the
current Fannie Mae posted yield for 90day delivery (Actual/Actual), plus sixtenths of 1 percent for 30-year fixed rate
conventional loans, rounded up to the
nearest one-quarter of 1 percent. The
first change made by this final rule
eliminates the lender’s published VA
rate for first mortgage loans with no
discount points as an option for a
maximum interest rate on loans. The
effect of this action is to create a more
uniform, simpler standard for interest
rates under the SFHGLP, whereby
lenders will always use the current
Fannie Mae rate as the rate ceiling. The
Fannie Mae rate is the interest rate
guidance most widely utilized by
approved lenders. It is also the most
accessible to lenders and the Agency
when documenting loan files to ensure
affordable interest rates are extended to
SFHGLP borrowers.
The second change made by this final
rule relates to the rights of the Secretary
when the Secretary has to pay a claim
under the guarantee for the loan and the
original lender did not originate the
loan in accordance with the program
requirements. This change allows the
Secretary in certain circumstances to
seek indemnification from the
originating lender for the Secretary’s
loss. This change promises to save
taxpayer money and incentivize due
care on the part of lenders by allowing
the Government to recoup the funds it
pays out in the event of a claim under
the guarantee where the original lender
did not comply with SFHGLP
requirements.
Discussion of Public Comments
Received on the May 19, 2010 Proposed
Rule
The Agency received comments from
three different sources in response to
the Proposed Rule. These comments
came from advocacy groups and a
community bank.
One commenter submitted a comment
on the Single Family Housing Direct
Loan Program and expressed general
concern about the affordability of
housing for low-income families. The
Agency acknowledges this comment
and notes that the changes being
adopted will affect only the Guaranteed
Loan Program.
One commenter agreed with the
Agency that the Fannie Mae published
rate is used by a much broader base of
investors than the VA index and stated
that the rule change creating a uniform
standard will cause only minimal
disruptions in business while lenders
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
implement the new policy. This
commenter requested that the final rule
provide at least a 60-day
implementation period to allow lenders
to make necessary system changes. The
Agency notes that the effective date of
the final rule is 60 days from the date
of publication in the Federal Register.
The commenter also recommended
that the Agency revise the rule to
require that the Ginnie Mae index be
used if the Fannie Mae index is not
available. The commenter made this
recommendation because the
commenter is concerned about future
changes to government sponsored
enterprises (GSEs). The Agency is aware
of the vulnerabilities surrounding the
GSEs and the potential for future
changes; however, the Agency believes
it would be premature to name a backup
index at this time. Additionally, Ginnie
Mae does not publish a similar index.
The Agency, therefore, has made no
changes to the final rule in response to
this comment.
One commenter expressed concern
that the proposed indemnification
policy is too broad. The commenter
agreed that indemnification is
appropriate in cases where a lender
commits fraud, but the commenter
expressed concern about a lender being
required to provide indemnification due
to an oversight by the lender or
deception by the borrower. The Agency
has revised the rule to clarify and limit
the circumstances under which
indemnification may be required. These
changes, which address the
commenter’s concerns, are described in
greater detail below.
Another commenter made similar
comments. The commenter agreed that
indemnification is appropriate in cases
of lender fraud or lender negligence, but
the commenter expressed concern about
lenders being held liable due to
unforeseen circumstances or
circumstances beyond their control.
This commenter recommended four
specific changes to the rule.
First, the commenter stated that
lender indemnification for fraud should
exclude fraud committed by a third
party, such as a borrower, real estate
agent, or seller. The Agency does not
intend to seek indemnification when
fraud was committed by a third party
and the lender had no knowledge of
such fraud. The Agency has revised the
rule to clarify that indemnification will
apply ‘‘when there was fraud or
misrepresentation in connection with
origination of the loan of which the
originating Lender had actual
knowledge at the time it became such
Lender or which the originating Lender
participated in or condoned.’’
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 104 / Tuesday, May 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Second, the commenter stated that
indemnification should not be
automatic in cases where the Agency
pays a claim within 24 months of
closing. The commenter wrote that
lenders should not be subject to
indemnification when borrowers default
on their loans due to circumstances
beyond the lender’s control. The Agency
disagrees with the commenter that
indemnification is automatic. A
prerequisite to indemnification in the
proposed rule was a determination by
the Agency that the Lender did not
originate a loan in accordance with the
requirements in 7 CFR part 1980,
subpart D. Further, the Agency has
revised the rule to clarify what
conditions must be satisfied before the
Agency can require indemnification
after paying a claim within 24 months
of loan closing.
Third, the commenter recommended
that in order for a lender to be liable due
to misrepresentation, the
misrepresentation must be proven by
clear and convincing evidence and the
misrepresentation must have been
discoverable prior to loan closing. The
Agency has revised the rule to provide
clarification regarding the
circumstances under which
indemnification may be required. If RHS
pays a loss claim within 24 months of
loan origination as a result of the
originating lender’s nonconforming
action or failure to act, RHS may seek
indemnification if: (1) The originating
lender utilized unsupported data or
omitted material information when
submitting the request for a conditional
commitment to RHS; (2) the originating
lender failed to properly verify and
analyze the applicant’s income and
employment history in accordance with
Agency guidelines; (3) the originating
lender failed to address property
deficiencies identified in the appraisal
or inspection report that affect the
health and safety of the occupants or the
structural integrity of the property; or
(4) the originating lender used an
appraiser that was not properly licensed
or certified, as appropriate, to make
residential real estate appraisals in
accordance with 7 CFR 1980.334(a). In
addition, RHS may seek indemnification
at any time, regardless of how long ago
the loan closed, if RHS determines that
there was fraud or misrepresentation in
connection with the origination of the
loan of which the originating lender had
actual knowledge at the time it became
such lender or which the originating
lender participated in or condoned and
RHS paid a loss claim as a result of the
originating lender’s nonconforming
action or failure to act. In this context,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:21 May 27, 2011
Jkt 223001
misrepresentation includes negligent
misrepresentation. With regard to the
commenter’s other suggestion, the
Agency has decided not to incorporate
the ‘‘clear and convincing evidence’’
standard into the rule. The Agency will
seek indemnification only when an
analysis of all available evidence
establishes that indemnification is
appropriate under the standards set
forth in the rule. Lenders are protected
in that a decision to require
indemnification from the lender may be
appealed to the USDA National Appeals
Division (NAD), and the final
determination of NAD shall be
reviewable by any United States District
Court of competent jurisdiction
according to NAD regulations at 7 CFR
part 11.
Fourth, the commenter requested that
program violations be limited to only
material program violations that
adversely affect the program. The
Agency agrees with the commenter that
indemnification is appropriate only
where the lender’s violation is material.
As discussed above, the Agency has
revised the rule to clarify and limit the
circumstances under which
indemnification may be required. The
Agency may seek indemnification only
when RHS pays a claim under the loan
note guarantee as a result of the
originating Lender’s nonconforming
action or failure to act.
The commenter also expressed
concern about whether lenders would
have appeal rights. As noted above,
indemnification will be treated as an
adverse decision, and the lender may
appeal the decision. The Agency has
revised section 1980.399(a)(2) of the
rule to make clear that the Lender may
appeal an indemnification decision
alone, without the participation of the
borrower.
One commenter stated that the
Agency’s indemnification policy should
be like the Federal Housing
Administration’s policy in that it should
apply only to the originating lender and
not to the servicer. The Agency agrees
and has clarified that indemnification
may only be sought from originating
lenders. As noted in 7 CFR 1980.309(f),
lenders are fully responsible for their
own actions and the actions of those
acting on their behalf, including during
loan origination.
One commenter asked for clarification
whether the same indemnification
standards would apply to loans that are
manually underwritten and loans that
are submitted through the Guaranteed
Underwriting System (GUS). The
Agency will apply the same
indemnification standards to all
guaranteed loans.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
31219
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1980
Home improvement, Loan programs—
Housing and community development,
Mortgage insurance, Mortgages, Rural
areas.
For the reason stated in the preamble,
Chapter XVIII, Title 7 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 1980—GENERAL
1. The authority citation for part 1980
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 and 7 U.S.C. 1989.
Subpart E also issued under 7 U.S.C. 1932(a).
Subpart D—Rural Housing Loans
2. Section 1980.308 is revised to read
as follows:
■
§ 1980.308 Full faith and credit and
indemnification.
(a) Full faith and credit. The loan note
guarantee constitutes an obligation
supported by the full faith and credit of
the United States and is incontestable
except for fraud or misrepresentation of
which the Lender has actual knowledge
at the time it becomes such Lender or
which the Lender participates in or
condones. Misrepresentation includes
negligent misrepresentation. A note
which provides for the payment of
interest on interest shall not be
guaranteed. Any guarantee or
assignment of a guarantee attached to or
relating to a note which provides for the
payment of interest on interest is void.
Notwithstanding the prohibition of
interest on interest, interest may be
capitalized in connection with
reamortization over the remaining term
with written concurrence of RHS. The
loan note guarantee will be
unenforceable to the extent any loss is
occasioned by violation of usury laws,
negligent servicing, or failure to obtain
the required security regardless of the
time at which RHS acquires knowledge
of the foregoing. Negligent servicing is
defined as servicing that is inconsistent
with this subpart and includes the
failure to perform those services which
a reasonably prudent lender would
perform in servicing its own loan
portfolio of loans that are not
guaranteed. The term includes not only
the concept of a failure to act, but also
not acting in a timely manner or acting
contrary to the manner in which a
reasonably prudent lender would act up
to the time of loan maturity or until a
final loss is paid. Any losses occasioned
will be unenforceable to the extent that
loan funds are used for purposes other
than those authorized in this subpart.
When the lender conducts liquidation
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
31220
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 104 / Tuesday, May 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
in an expeditious manner, in
accordance with the provisions of
§ 1980.374 of this subpart, the loan note
guarantee shall cover interest until the
claim is paid within the limit of the
guarantee.
(b) Indemnification. If RHS
determines that a Lender did not
originate a loan in accordance with the
requirements in this subpart, and RHS
pays a loss claim under the loan note
guarantee as a result of the originating
Lender’s nonconforming action or
failure to act, RHS may revoke the
originating Lender’s eligibility status in
accordance with § 1980.309(h) of this
subpart and may also require the
originating Lender:
(1) To indemnify RHS for the loss, if
the payment under the guarantee was
made within 24 months of loan closing,
when one or more of the following
conditions is satisfied:
(i) The originating Lender utilized
unsupported data or omitted material
information when submitting the
request for a conditional commitment to
RHS;
(ii) The originating Lender failed to
properly verify and analyze the
applicant’s income and employment
history in accordance with Agency
guidelines;
(iii) The originating Lender failed to
address property deficiencies identified
in the appraisal or inspection report that
affect the health and safety of the
occupants or the structural integrity of
the property;
(iv) The originating Lender used an
appraiser that was not properly licensed
or certified, as appropriate, to make
residential real estate appraisals in
accordance with § 1980.334(a) of this
subpart; or,
(2) To indemnify RHS for the loss,
regardless of how long ago the loan
closed, if RHS determines that there was
fraud or misrepresentation in
connection with the origination of the
loan of which the originating Lender
had actual knowledge at the time it
became such Lender or which the
originating Lender participated in or
condoned. Misrepresentation includes
negligent misrepresentation.
■ 3. Section 1980.320 is revised to read
as follows:
rmajette on DSK89S0YB1PROD with RULES
§ 1980.320
Interest rate.
The interest rate must not exceed the
established, applicable usury rate. Loans
guaranteed under this subpart must bear
a fixed interest rate over the life of the
loan. The rate shall be agreed upon by
the borrower and the Lender and must
not be more than the current Fannie
Mae rate as defined in § 1980.302(a) of
this subpart. The Lender must
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:21 May 27, 2011
Jkt 223001
document the rate and the date it was
determined.
■ 4. Section 1980.353(c)(4) is revised to
read as follows:
§ 1980.353 Filing and processing
applications.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(4) Anticipated loan rates and terms,
the date and amount of the Fannie Mae
rate used to determine the interest rate,
and the Lender’s certification that the
proposed rate is in compliance with
§ 1980.320 of this subpart.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Section 1980.399(a)(2) is revised to
read as follows:
§ 1980.399
Appeals.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(2) The Lender may appeal without
the borrower where RHS has:
(i) Denied or reduced the amount of
a loss payment to the Lender; or
(ii) Required an originating Lender to
indemnify RHS for a loss payment.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: April 15, 2011.
Dallas Tonsanger,
Under Secretary, Rural Development.
Dated: April 21, 2011.
Michael Scuse,
Acting Under Secretary, Farm and Foreign
Agricultural Services.
[FR Doc. 2011–13061 Filed 5–27–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–XV–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
9 CFR Part 93
[Docket No. APHIS–2008–0112]
RIN 0579–AD31
Importation of Horses From
Contagious Equine Metritis-Affected
Countries
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Interim rule; delay of
enforcement.
AGENCY:
On March 25, 2011, we
published an interim rule in the Federal
Register to amend the regulations
regarding the importation of horses from
countries affected with contagious
equine metritis (CEM) by incorporating
an additional certification requirement
for imported horses 731 days of age or
less and adding new testing protocols
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
for test mares and imported stallions
and mares more than 731 days of age.
That interim rule became effective on
March 25, 2011; however, we are
delaying the enforcement of the interim
rule until July 25, 2011. This action is
necessary to provide CEM testing
facilities time to make adjustments to
their operating procedures that are
necessary for the rule to be successfully
implemented.
DATES: Enforcement of the interim rule
amending 9 CFR part 93, published at
76 FR 16683–16686 on March 25, 2011,
is delayed until July 25, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Ellen Buck, Senior Staff Veterinarian,
Equine Imports, National Center for
Import and Export, VS, APHIS, 4700
River Road Unit 36, Riverdale, MD
20737–1231; (301) 734–8364.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in 9 CFR part 93
(referred to below as the regulations)
prohibit or restrict the importation of
certain animals into the United States to
prevent the introduction of
communicable diseases of livestock and
poultry. ‘‘Subpart C—Horses,’’ §§ 93.300
through 93.326, pertains to the
importation of horses into the United
States. Sections 93.301 and 93.304 of
the regulations contain specific
provisions for the importation of horses
from regions affected with contagious
equine metritis (CEM), which is a highly
contagious venereal disease of horses
and other equines caused by an
infection with the bacterium Taylorella
equigenitalis.
On March 25, 2011, we published an
interim rule in the Federal Register (76
FR 16683–16686, Docket No. APHIS–
2008–0112) to amend the regulations
regarding the importation of horses from
countries affected with CEM by
incorporating an additional certification
requirement for imported horses 731
days of age or less and adding new
testing protocols for test mares and
imported stallions and mares more than
731 days of age. The provisions of the
interim rule became effective March 25,
2011, and we will consider all
comments on the interim rule received
on or before May 24, 2011.
Delay of Enforcement
After the publication of the interim
rule, we received comments that raised
a variety of issues, including the
feasibility of immediately implementing
certain requirements.
Based on our review of the comments
received to date, we consider it
advisable to delay our enforcement of
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 31, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31217-31220]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-13061]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 104 / Tuesday, May 31, 2011 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 31217]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Rural Housing Service
Rural Business-Cooperative Service
Rural Utilities Service
Farm Service Agency
7 CFR Part 1980
RIN 0575-AC83
Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program
AGENCIES: Rural Housing Service, Rural Business-Cooperative Service,
Rural Utilities Service, Farm Service Agency, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule implements two changes in the regulations for
the Rural Housing Service (RHS) Section 502 Single Family Housing
Guaranteed Loan Program (SFHGLP) by eliminating the lender's published
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rate for first mortgage loans with
no discount points as an option for a maximum interest rate on loans
and by allowing the Secretary to seek indemnification from the
originating lender if a loss is paid under certain circumstances. This
action is taken to achieve savings for the taxpayer, simplify
regulations, and promote efficiency in managing the SFHGLP.
DATES: Effective Date: August 1, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joaquin Tremols, Acting Director,
Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Division, USDA Rural Development,
Room 2241, STOP 0784, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC
20250, Telephone: (202) 720-1465, E-mail: joaquin.tremols@wdc.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Classification
This final rule has been determined to be non-significant by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866.
Executive Order 12988
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. Except where specified, all State and local laws and
regulations that are in direct conflict with this rule will be
preempted. Federal funds carry Federal requirements. No person is
required to apply for funding under this program, but if they do apply
and are selected for funding, they must comply with the requirements
applicable to the Federal program funds. This rule is not retroactive.
It will not affect agreements entered into prior to the effective date
of the rule. Before any judicial action may be brought regarding the
provisions of this rule, the administrative appeal provisions of 7 CFR
part 11 must be exhausted.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effect of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the
Agency generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal
mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100
million, or more, in any one year. When such a statement is needed for
a rule, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the Agency to
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule.
This rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, and tribal
governments or the private sector. Therefore, this rule is not subject
to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Environmental Impact Statement
This document has been reviewed in accordance with 7 CFR part 1940,
subpart G, ``Environmental Program.'' It is the determination of the
Agency that this action does not constitute a major Federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, and, in
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq., neither an Environmental Assessment nor an
Environmental Impact Statement is required.
Federalism--Executive Order 13132
The policies contained in this rule do not have any substantial
direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national
government and States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor does this
rule impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local
governments. Therefore, consultation with the States is not required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) the undersigned has determined and certified by signature of this
document that this rule change will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. This rule does not impose any
significant new requirements on Agency applicants and borrowers, and
the regulatory changes affect only Agency determination of program
benefits for guarantees of loans made to individuals. Changes impacting
lenders will impact all approved lenders doing business under this
program. There is no distinction made between small and large lenders.
Intergovernmental Consultation
This program/activity is not subject to the provisions of Executive
Order 12372, which require intergovernmental consultation with State
and local officials. (See the Notice related to 7 CFR part 3015,
subpart V, at 48 FR 29112, June 24, 1983; 49 FR 22675, May 31, 1984; 50
FR 14088, April 10, 1985.)
Programs Affected
This program is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance under Number 10.410, Very Low to Moderate Income Housing
Loans (Section 502 Rural Housing Loans).
[[Page 31218]]
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection and record keeping requirements
contained in this regulation have been approved by OMB in accordance
with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The
assigned OMB control number is 0575-0078.
E-Government Act Compliance
The Rural Housing Service is committed to complying with the E-
Government Act, to promote the use of the Internet and other
information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen
access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.
Non-Discrimination Statement
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination
in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color,
national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital
status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation,
genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance
program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with
disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program
information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact
USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a
complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil
Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-9410, or
call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal
opportunity provider, employer, and lender.
Background
In the spring of 2009, the Inspector General completed an audit of
the controls over lending activities in the SFHGLP. The audit evaluated
the systems and processes to ensure that lenders (1) submit accurate
and legitimate borrower eligibility data and (2) set interest rates on
loans within Agency guidelines. The audit report made a number of
recommendations for what the SFHGLP can do to streamline operations,
prevent fraud, and improve efficiency in its mission. As a result of
the audit a proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on May
19, 2010 (75 FR 27949).
Under the existing SFHGLP regulation, lenders may set an interest
rate for a loan that does not exceed the higher of the Lender's
published rate for VA first mortgage loans with no discount points or
the current Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) rate as
defined in 7 CFR 1980.302(a), currently defined as the current Fannie
Mae posted yield for 90-day delivery (Actual/Actual), plus six-tenths
of 1 percent for 30-year fixed rate conventional loans, rounded up to
the nearest one-quarter of 1 percent. The first change made by this
final rule eliminates the lender's published VA rate for first mortgage
loans with no discount points as an option for a maximum interest rate
on loans. The effect of this action is to create a more uniform,
simpler standard for interest rates under the SFHGLP, whereby lenders
will always use the current Fannie Mae rate as the rate ceiling. The
Fannie Mae rate is the interest rate guidance most widely utilized by
approved lenders. It is also the most accessible to lenders and the
Agency when documenting loan files to ensure affordable interest rates
are extended to SFHGLP borrowers.
The second change made by this final rule relates to the rights of
the Secretary when the Secretary has to pay a claim under the guarantee
for the loan and the original lender did not originate the loan in
accordance with the program requirements. This change allows the
Secretary in certain circumstances to seek indemnification from the
originating lender for the Secretary's loss. This change promises to
save taxpayer money and incentivize due care on the part of lenders by
allowing the Government to recoup the funds it pays out in the event of
a claim under the guarantee where the original lender did not comply
with SFHGLP requirements.
Discussion of Public Comments Received on the May 19, 2010 Proposed
Rule
The Agency received comments from three different sources in
response to the Proposed Rule. These comments came from advocacy groups
and a community bank.
One commenter submitted a comment on the Single Family Housing
Direct Loan Program and expressed general concern about the
affordability of housing for low-income families. The Agency
acknowledges this comment and notes that the changes being adopted will
affect only the Guaranteed Loan Program.
One commenter agreed with the Agency that the Fannie Mae published
rate is used by a much broader base of investors than the VA index and
stated that the rule change creating a uniform standard will cause only
minimal disruptions in business while lenders implement the new policy.
This commenter requested that the final rule provide at least a 60-day
implementation period to allow lenders to make necessary system
changes. The Agency notes that the effective date of the final rule is
60 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.
The commenter also recommended that the Agency revise the rule to
require that the Ginnie Mae index be used if the Fannie Mae index is
not available. The commenter made this recommendation because the
commenter is concerned about future changes to government sponsored
enterprises (GSEs). The Agency is aware of the vulnerabilities
surrounding the GSEs and the potential for future changes; however, the
Agency believes it would be premature to name a backup index at this
time. Additionally, Ginnie Mae does not publish a similar index. The
Agency, therefore, has made no changes to the final rule in response to
this comment.
One commenter expressed concern that the proposed indemnification
policy is too broad. The commenter agreed that indemnification is
appropriate in cases where a lender commits fraud, but the commenter
expressed concern about a lender being required to provide
indemnification due to an oversight by the lender or deception by the
borrower. The Agency has revised the rule to clarify and limit the
circumstances under which indemnification may be required. These
changes, which address the commenter's concerns, are described in
greater detail below.
Another commenter made similar comments. The commenter agreed that
indemnification is appropriate in cases of lender fraud or lender
negligence, but the commenter expressed concern about lenders being
held liable due to unforeseen circumstances or circumstances beyond
their control. This commenter recommended four specific changes to the
rule.
First, the commenter stated that lender indemnification for fraud
should exclude fraud committed by a third party, such as a borrower,
real estate agent, or seller. The Agency does not intend to seek
indemnification when fraud was committed by a third party and the
lender had no knowledge of such fraud. The Agency has revised the rule
to clarify that indemnification will apply ``when there was fraud or
misrepresentation in connection with origination of the loan of which
the originating Lender had actual knowledge at the time it became such
Lender or which the originating Lender participated in or condoned.''
[[Page 31219]]
Second, the commenter stated that indemnification should not be
automatic in cases where the Agency pays a claim within 24 months of
closing. The commenter wrote that lenders should not be subject to
indemnification when borrowers default on their loans due to
circumstances beyond the lender's control. The Agency disagrees with
the commenter that indemnification is automatic. A prerequisite to
indemnification in the proposed rule was a determination by the Agency
that the Lender did not originate a loan in accordance with the
requirements in 7 CFR part 1980, subpart D. Further, the Agency has
revised the rule to clarify what conditions must be satisfied before
the Agency can require indemnification after paying a claim within 24
months of loan closing.
Third, the commenter recommended that in order for a lender to be
liable due to misrepresentation, the misrepresentation must be proven
by clear and convincing evidence and the misrepresentation must have
been discoverable prior to loan closing. The Agency has revised the
rule to provide clarification regarding the circumstances under which
indemnification may be required. If RHS pays a loss claim within 24
months of loan origination as a result of the originating lender's
nonconforming action or failure to act, RHS may seek indemnification
if: (1) The originating lender utilized unsupported data or omitted
material information when submitting the request for a conditional
commitment to RHS; (2) the originating lender failed to properly verify
and analyze the applicant's income and employment history in accordance
with Agency guidelines; (3) the originating lender failed to address
property deficiencies identified in the appraisal or inspection report
that affect the health and safety of the occupants or the structural
integrity of the property; or (4) the originating lender used an
appraiser that was not properly licensed or certified, as appropriate,
to make residential real estate appraisals in accordance with 7 CFR
1980.334(a). In addition, RHS may seek indemnification at any time,
regardless of how long ago the loan closed, if RHS determines that
there was fraud or misrepresentation in connection with the origination
of the loan of which the originating lender had actual knowledge at the
time it became such lender or which the originating lender participated
in or condoned and RHS paid a loss claim as a result of the originating
lender's nonconforming action or failure to act. In this context,
misrepresentation includes negligent misrepresentation. With regard to
the commenter's other suggestion, the Agency has decided not to
incorporate the ``clear and convincing evidence'' standard into the
rule. The Agency will seek indemnification only when an analysis of all
available evidence establishes that indemnification is appropriate
under the standards set forth in the rule. Lenders are protected in
that a decision to require indemnification from the lender may be
appealed to the USDA National Appeals Division (NAD), and the final
determination of NAD shall be reviewable by any United States District
Court of competent jurisdiction according to NAD regulations at 7 CFR
part 11.
Fourth, the commenter requested that program violations be limited
to only material program violations that adversely affect the program.
The Agency agrees with the commenter that indemnification is
appropriate only where the lender's violation is material. As discussed
above, the Agency has revised the rule to clarify and limit the
circumstances under which indemnification may be required. The Agency
may seek indemnification only when RHS pays a claim under the loan note
guarantee as a result of the originating Lender's nonconforming action
or failure to act.
The commenter also expressed concern about whether lenders would
have appeal rights. As noted above, indemnification will be treated as
an adverse decision, and the lender may appeal the decision. The Agency
has revised section 1980.399(a)(2) of the rule to make clear that the
Lender may appeal an indemnification decision alone, without the
participation of the borrower.
One commenter stated that the Agency's indemnification policy
should be like the Federal Housing Administration's policy in that it
should apply only to the originating lender and not to the servicer.
The Agency agrees and has clarified that indemnification may only be
sought from originating lenders. As noted in 7 CFR 1980.309(f), lenders
are fully responsible for their own actions and the actions of those
acting on their behalf, including during loan origination.
One commenter asked for clarification whether the same
indemnification standards would apply to loans that are manually
underwritten and loans that are submitted through the Guaranteed
Underwriting System (GUS). The Agency will apply the same
indemnification standards to all guaranteed loans.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1980
Home improvement, Loan programs--Housing and community development,
Mortgage insurance, Mortgages, Rural areas.
For the reason stated in the preamble, Chapter XVIII, Title 7 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 1980--GENERAL
0
1. The authority citation for part 1980 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 and 7 U.S.C. 1989. Subpart E also issued
under 7 U.S.C. 1932(a).
Subpart D--Rural Housing Loans
0
2. Section 1980.308 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1980.308 Full faith and credit and indemnification.
(a) Full faith and credit. The loan note guarantee constitutes an
obligation supported by the full faith and credit of the United States
and is incontestable except for fraud or misrepresentation of which the
Lender has actual knowledge at the time it becomes such Lender or which
the Lender participates in or condones. Misrepresentation includes
negligent misrepresentation. A note which provides for the payment of
interest on interest shall not be guaranteed. Any guarantee or
assignment of a guarantee attached to or relating to a note which
provides for the payment of interest on interest is void.
Notwithstanding the prohibition of interest on interest, interest may
be capitalized in connection with reamortization over the remaining
term with written concurrence of RHS. The loan note guarantee will be
unenforceable to the extent any loss is occasioned by violation of
usury laws, negligent servicing, or failure to obtain the required
security regardless of the time at which RHS acquires knowledge of the
foregoing. Negligent servicing is defined as servicing that is
inconsistent with this subpart and includes the failure to perform
those services which a reasonably prudent lender would perform in
servicing its own loan portfolio of loans that are not guaranteed. The
term includes not only the concept of a failure to act, but also not
acting in a timely manner or acting contrary to the manner in which a
reasonably prudent lender would act up to the time of loan maturity or
until a final loss is paid. Any losses occasioned will be unenforceable
to the extent that loan funds are used for purposes other than those
authorized in this subpart. When the lender conducts liquidation
[[Page 31220]]
in an expeditious manner, in accordance with the provisions of Sec.
1980.374 of this subpart, the loan note guarantee shall cover interest
until the claim is paid within the limit of the guarantee.
(b) Indemnification. If RHS determines that a Lender did not
originate a loan in accordance with the requirements in this subpart,
and RHS pays a loss claim under the loan note guarantee as a result of
the originating Lender's nonconforming action or failure to act, RHS
may revoke the originating Lender's eligibility status in accordance
with Sec. 1980.309(h) of this subpart and may also require the
originating Lender:
(1) To indemnify RHS for the loss, if the payment under the
guarantee was made within 24 months of loan closing, when one or more
of the following conditions is satisfied:
(i) The originating Lender utilized unsupported data or omitted
material information when submitting the request for a conditional
commitment to RHS;
(ii) The originating Lender failed to properly verify and analyze
the applicant's income and employment history in accordance with Agency
guidelines;
(iii) The originating Lender failed to address property
deficiencies identified in the appraisal or inspection report that
affect the health and safety of the occupants or the structural
integrity of the property;
(iv) The originating Lender used an appraiser that was not properly
licensed or certified, as appropriate, to make residential real estate
appraisals in accordance with Sec. 1980.334(a) of this subpart; or,
(2) To indemnify RHS for the loss, regardless of how long ago the
loan closed, if RHS determines that there was fraud or
misrepresentation in connection with the origination of the loan of
which the originating Lender had actual knowledge at the time it became
such Lender or which the originating Lender participated in or
condoned. Misrepresentation includes negligent misrepresentation.
0
3. Section 1980.320 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1980.320 Interest rate.
The interest rate must not exceed the established, applicable usury
rate. Loans guaranteed under this subpart must bear a fixed interest
rate over the life of the loan. The rate shall be agreed upon by the
borrower and the Lender and must not be more than the current Fannie
Mae rate as defined in Sec. 1980.302(a) of this subpart. The Lender
must document the rate and the date it was determined.
0
4. Section 1980.353(c)(4) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1980.353 Filing and processing applications.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) Anticipated loan rates and terms, the date and amount of the
Fannie Mae rate used to determine the interest rate, and the Lender's
certification that the proposed rate is in compliance with Sec.
1980.320 of this subpart.
* * * * *
0
5. Section 1980.399(a)(2) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1980.399 Appeals.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(2) The Lender may appeal without the borrower where RHS has:
(i) Denied or reduced the amount of a loss payment to the Lender;
or
(ii) Required an originating Lender to indemnify RHS for a loss
payment.
* * * * *
Dated: April 15, 2011.
Dallas Tonsanger,
Under Secretary, Rural Development.
Dated: April 21, 2011.
Michael Scuse,
Acting Under Secretary, Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services.
[FR Doc. 2011-13061 Filed 5-27-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-XV-P