HUD Healthcare Facility Documents: Notice Announcing Final Approved Documents and Assignment of OMB Control Number, 16279-16286 [2013-05826]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 50 / Thursday, March 14, 2013 / Notices
Public and Indian Housing, MTW
Demonstration program which includes
Public Housing, Section 8 Housing
Choice Voucher, Section 8 Project Based
Certificates and Vouchers, Section 8
Moderate Rehabilitation and MTW
Demonstration programs.
Number of
respondents
Reporting Burden: ....................................................................................
Total Estimated Burden Hours:
1,081,685.
Status: This is a revision of an
existing collection.
Dated: March 5, 2013.
Colette Pollard,
Department Reports Management Officer,
Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013–05817 Filed 3–13–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–5623–N–03]
HUD Healthcare Facility Documents:
Notice Announcing Final Approved
Documents and Assignment of OMB
Control Number
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This notice announces that
the healthcare facility documents have
completed the notice and comment
processes and review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act, and that OMB has assigned a
control number to the documents. The
final versions of the documents can be
found on HUD’s Web site at
www.hud.gov/232forms. Additionally,
this notice highlights some of the
changes made by HUD to the documents
based upon its review of the comments
submitted in response to a November
21, 2012 notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Roger Miller, Deputy Assistant
Secretary, Office of Healthcare
Programs, Office of Housing,
Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room
6264, Washington, DC 20410–0500;
telephone number 202–708–0599 (this
is not a toll-free number). Persons with
speech or hearing impairments may
access this number through TTY by
calling the toll-free Federal Information
Relay Service at 800–877–8339.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Mar 13, 2013
Jkt 229001
4,149
692.92
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as
amended.
SUMMARY:
Annual
responses
I. Background
On May 3, 2012 (77 FR 26304) and
consistent with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), HUD
published for public comment, for a
period of 60 days, a notice (60-day
Notice) advising that HUD was updating
and revising a set of production,
underwriting, asset management,
closing, and other documents used in
connection with transactions involving
healthcare facilities, excluding
hospitals, that are insured pursuant to
section 232 of the National Housing Act
(Section 232). These documents are
referred to collectively as the healthcare
facility documents. The 60-day Notice
followed adoption of updates and
revisions to documents used for FHA’s
multifamily programs, and initiated the
public review process for obtaining
approval of changes to these specific
healthcare facility documents under the
PRA. In conjunction with publication of
the 60-day Notice, the proposed revised
healthcare facility documents were
made available at: www.hud.gov/
232forms.
Along with the 60-day Notice, HUD
also published on May 3, 2012, at 77 FR
26218, a proposed rule that proposed to
strengthen regulations for HUD’s
Section 232 program to reflect current
policy and practices, and to improve
accountability and strengthen risk
management. A final rule following the
May 3, 2012, proposed rule, and taking
into consideration public comment
received on the proposed rule, was
published on September 7, 2012, at 77
FR 55120 (2012 Final 232 Rule).
As a special outreach to the public on
proposed changes to the Section 232
program regulations, HUD hosted a
forum, the ‘‘Section 232 Document and
Proposed Rule Forum’’ on May 31,
2012, in Washington, DC. A video of
this forum is available on the HUD Web
site at https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/
HUD?src=/press/multimedia/videos.
While comments were raised and
discussed at the forum, as reflected in
the video, HUD encouraged forum
participants to file written comments
through the www.regulations.gov Web
site so that all comments would be more
easily accessible to interested parties.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16279
Hours per
response
Burden
hours
0.376
×
1,081,685
All comments, whether submitted
through www.regulations.gov or raised
at the forum, were considered in the
development of the revised documents
which were published on November 21,
2012 (77 FR 69870), and for which,
consistent with the PRA, comment was
solicited for an additional 30 days.
In the 30-day PRA notice published
on November 21, 2012 (77 FR 69870)
(30-day Notice) HUD identified
substantive changes that were made to
the healthcare facility documents in
response to public comments submitted
on the 60-day Notice, responded to
significant issues raised by the
commenters, and identified proposed
additional changes based on further
consideration of certain issues. All the
public comments submitted on the
proposed updated documents were
available for review on
www.regulations.gov, and a HUD web
page included proposed mark-ups of the
documents. The documents can be
found on HUD’s Web site at:
www.hud.gov/232forms.
This notice published today
announces that HUD has completed the
notice and comment processes required
by the PRA, and that OMB has
completed its review and has assigned
an OMB control number 2502–0605 to
the documents. HUD made additional
changes to the documents in response to
comments submitted on the 30-day
Notice. Therefore, in addition to
announcing the completion of the
process required by the PRA and the
assignment of the OMB control number,
HUD highlights some of the additional
changes made to the healthcare facility
documents (documents) in response to
public comment as provided below.
II. Status of Changes to Documents
In response to comments that were
received on the 60-day Notice and the
30-day Notice, HUD made a number of
revisions to the documents. The changes
to these documents include both
technical editorial changes and some
more substantive changes.
This notice does not provide a
detailed summary of all of the changes
made or responses to all of the issues
raised in the final set of public
comments on the 30-day Notice. Rather,
the discussion in the following sections
E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM
14MRN1
16280
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 50 / Thursday, March 14, 2013 / Notices
of this notice highlights certain changes
which are representative of the types of
changes made in response to some of
the more significant issues raised by the
commenters in response to the 30-day
Notice and the accompanying
documents posted on HUD’s Web site.
In this notice, HUD is not repeating
responses to all the proposed changes or
issues that were addressed in the prior
notices. The final versions of the
documents and the redlined versions
which detail specific changes to the
documents posted in connection with
the 30-day Notice are available on
HUD’s Web site: www.hud.gov/
232forms.
Please also note that commenters have
varied their references to specific
provisions in the documents; sometimes
the commenters referred to the
provision in the healthcare facility
document as sections, subsections, and
paragraphs. Efforts have been made to
track and maintain those references in
this notice.
III. Selected Policy Determinations
Some of the changes suggested to the
documents by the commenters on the
30-day Notice were similar to changes
suggested by commenters on the 60-day
Notice, and were already addressed by
HUD in the 30-day Notice. Further, the
redlined and final documents posted on
HUD’s Web site in conjunction with this
final notice detail all of the changes
HUD made in response to the points
made by the commenters. Therefore the
changes discussed below highlight, in a
comment and response format, a
summary of areas where HUD has made
significant policy or other substantive
determinations.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
IV. The Public Comments
A. The Commenters
The public comment period for the
30-day Notice closed on December 21,
2012, and public comments were
received from 5 sets of commenters
(some individuals, some a group of
individuals, each set referred to in this
notice as a ‘‘commenter’’). Comments
were submitted by associations
representing surety bond insurance
companies, mortgage bankers, accounts
receivable (AR) lenders, lenders
specializing in HUD programs, and
private practice attorneys.
All comments were carefully
considered by HUD prior to
presentation to OMB for final approval
and assignment of a control number
under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
B. General Recommendations
This section of the summary includes
summaries of ‘‘cross-cutting’’ issues that
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Mar 13, 2013
Jkt 229001
were emphasized in commenters’
summaries.
Comment: Treatment of Non-Profit
Borrowers. One comment stated that
HUD is deviating from long-standing
HUD policy with respect to non-profit
borrowers, and recommended that HUD
reconsider revising provisions in the
Healthcare Regulatory Agreement—
Borrower (‘‘Borrower’s Regulatory
Agreement’’) regarding non-profit
borrowers. The commenter stated that
under the proposed Borrower’s
Regulatory Agreement, all non-profit
borrowers will be required to maintain
a residual receipts account that
essentially amounts to a long-term debt
service escrow merely because they are
non-profit entities. The commenter
stated that such a requirement should be
waived if in all other respects, the nonprofit is being treated the same as a forprofit borrower, not benefiting at all
from its non-profit status. The
commenter stated that it is counter to
HUD’s mission for HUD to treat nonprofit borrowers disadvantageously
solely because they are non-profit
entities.
HUD Response: The commenter is not
correct that the proposed Borrower’s
Regulatory Agreement deviates from
long-standing HUD policy. It is wellestablished, long-standing HUD policy
in both the healthcare and multifamily
programs to require non-profit
borrowers to maintain residual receipts
accounts rather than allowing non-profit
borrowers to make distributions of
surplus cash. Although the policy for
healthcare program transactions is
different than the policy for multifamily
program transactions, it is also longstanding HUD policy for both programs
to provide some limits, waivers and
exceptions to this general policy. The
commenter’s concerns relate to these
limits, waivers and exceptions. In the
healthcare program, the extent of and
the conditions required for these limits,
waivers, and exceptions has been
evolving for many years. The healthcare
program policy regarding non-profits
documented in the proposed Borrower’s
Regulatory Agreement had been widely
used prior to the publication of the 30day Notice, but had also been frequently
waived or modified, as may have been
negotiated on a deal-specific basis. The
proposed provisions in the Borrower’s
Regulatory Agreement attempted to
document and standardize this policy
nationwide and program-wide. Upon
consideration of the commenter’s
comments, HUD has further clarified
these provisions. For example, HUD has
provided instruction in the document
that where a non-profit borrower is
seeking to re-finance HUD-insured debt
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
under Section 223(a)(7), and the nonprofit borrower’s current regulatory
agreement identifies the borrower as a
for-profit borrower, HUD will continue
to identify the borrower as a for-profit
borrower for purposes of the borrower’s
regulatory agreement.
Comment: HUD should differentiate
between Affiliated and Unaffiliated
Operators. A commenter stated that
HUD must differentiate between
operators who have an ‘‘identity of
interest’’ with the HUD borrower (an
‘‘affiliated operator’’) and operators who
have no identity of interest with the
HUD borrower (an ‘‘unaffiliated
operator’’). The commenter stated that a
non-affiliated operator will be
extraordinarily reluctant to follow
HUD’s requirements as set forth in the
documents, as typically, an unaffiliated
operator would have little, if any,
incentive to subject itself and its assets
to its landlord’s loan liabilities. The
commenter stated that these issues
would be most pronounced for the
unaffiliated operators in the security
agreements required of the master
tenant and of the operator, the master
tenant’s and operator’s regulatory
agreements, and the Subordination,
Non-Disturbance and Attornment
Agreement (SNDA). The commenter
recommended that FHA create a
separate set of these and other form
documents for unaffiliated operators.
HUD Response: HUD has considered
these comments carefully, but as a
policy matter at this time has decided
generally to not differentiate between
affiliated and unaffiliated operators.
HUD has determined that the policies
regarding operators in the documents
reflect reasonable and sound business
practices, and reasonable and necessary
oversight, regardless of the affiliation, if
any, between the operator and the
borrower. HUD believes that most
operators (whether or not affiliated with
the borrower), upon careful
consideration, will find the provisions
reasonable, but HUD also recognizes
that some unaffiliated operators may not
agree with this policy choice and may
choose not to participate in HUD
programs as a result. However, HUD has
determined that, at this time, the need
to establish clearer and more direct
oversight over operators outweighs this
potential effect. HUD also notes that, to
limit decreases in unaffiliated operator
participation, unaffiliated operators
have been given greater rights than
affiliated operators through the SNDA,
as demonstrated in the SNDA published
in connection with the 30-day Notice.
Comment: Security of Obligations.
Multiple commenters stated that, in
various documents, the obligations
E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM
14MRN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 50 / Thursday, March 14, 2013 / Notices
secured by pledges of the operator and/
or the master tenant should be limited
to direct obligations of the operator and/
or master tenant under documents to
which each is a party, respectively,
rather than the borrower’s obligations
under the Loan Documents.
HUD Response: HUD disagrees.
HUD’s approach to the healthcare
programs is and has always been
holistic, to oversee and assess the entire
project, not merely to provide mortgage
insurance for a real estate transaction.
HUD has a strong interest in the viable
operation of the healthcare facility and
regards all funds derived from the
operation of the healthcare facility as
project funds, pursuant to 24 CFR
232.1005.
Comment: Project Operating
Deficiencies must be revised and must
not be deemed ‘‘Events of Default’’. A
commenter stated that HUD should
revise its definition of ‘‘project
operating deficiencies’’ in various
documents, including regulatory
agreements and the SNDA, and that
HUD should clarify that project
operating deficiencies shall not be
deemed an ‘‘event of default’’ under
those documents. The commenter also
stated that operators have already
objected to the ‘‘project operating
deficiencies’’ provisions included in the
SNDA form currently in use, and that
well-established operators will be
unwilling to subject themselves to these
provisions only to cooperate with their
landlords in obtaining HUD-insured
financing. The commenter stated that
this is the case for both affiliated and
unaffiliated operators. The commenter
stated that there should be no subjective
determinants of what constitutes a
project operating deficiency and that the
occurrence of a project operating
deficiency should not constitute an
event of default entitling HUD or the
lender to terminate an operator’s lease
or replace the operator. The commenter
recommended that HUD allow an
operator that is otherwise paying rent
under the lease, for so long as there is
no material risk of termination of the
operator’s necessary permits and
approvals, to continue to operate and
address its problems.
HUD Response: HUD agrees with the
commenter in part and disagrees in part.
HUD agrees that the criteria for what
constitutes a project operating
deficiency should not be subjective, and
has determined that the criteria are
objective, fair, and reasonable. HUD also
agrees that the purpose of recognizing a
project operating deficiency is to
identify a struggling project before the
project fails and an event of default is
declared, and to consider the use of a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Mar 13, 2013
Jkt 229001
consultant as one potential tool to avert
an event of default. Therefore, HUD
agrees that the occurrence of a project
operating deficiency, in and of itself,
does not constitute an event of default
and believes nothing in the documents
indicates otherwise. Moreover, HUD
notes that, as a mortgage insurer, HUD’s
incentives are not aligned with calling
a default on either the operator or the
borrower when doing so could prompt
an otherwise avoidable claim.
Comment: Revise Timeframes for
Cure Rights and Cure Periods. A
commenter recommended that HUD
allow reasonable timeframes for curing
events of default under the documents.
The commenter stated that where a
borrower or operator is granted a 30-day
cure period, as a matter of course, that
30-day cure period should be extended
so long as the defaulting party
commences to cure within 30 days and
diligently pursues the cure to
completion. The commenter stated that
a limitation on that extended cure
period during material risks of
termination of necessary permits and
approvals or payment defaults,
however, is reasonable.
HUD Response: HUD has carefully
considered this comment and has
determined that, although most cure
period provisions set forth in the
documents are appropriate and include
extensions where appropriate, the cure
period in the operator’s security
agreement should include an extension
similar to the cure period in the
operator’s regulatory agreement, and has
revised the document to include such
extension.
Comment: Make the Lender a ThirdParty Beneficiary to the Regulatory
Agreements. A commenter stated that
the FHA lender should be a third-party
beneficiary of borrowers’, master
tenants’, and operators’ obligations
under their respective regulatory
agreements. The commenter stated that
the lender’s ability to exercise HUD’s
rights in those documents benefits HUD
because it gives the lender an alternative
recovery source other than assigning the
loan to HUD.
HUD Response: HUD has determined
that it is not appropriate for the lender
to be a third-party beneficiary to the
regulatory agreements. The lender’s
rights with respect to the borrower are
set forth in the other loan documents
and the lender has adequate ability
pursuant to the loan documents to
pursue the borrower for violations of its
covenants and of program obligations.
Comment: Regulatory Agreement
Defaults should be Defaults under the
Security Agreements. A commenter
stated that any default of either the
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16281
regulatory agreements should result in a
default of the respective security
agreement or security instrument,
without the separate need for HUD
consent to such treatment. The
commenter stated that this revision
would provide lenders with increased
ability to remedy defaults without
assigning loans to HUD.
HUD Response: Consistent with the
determinations HUD made with regard
to the multifamily program, HUD has
determined that defaults of the
regulatory agreements should not
constitute defaults under the other loan
documents without HUD’s consent.
While the other loan documents set
forth the lenders’ rights with respect to
the borrower, the regulatory agreement
is a HUD-driven document. Contrary to
the commenter’s assertions, HUD has
determined that allowing the lender to
call an event of default under the other
loan documents for regulatory
agreement defaults without HUD
consent increases and facilitates the
lenders’ ability to assign the defaulting
loan to HUD, increasing HUD’s risk and
exposure.
C. Document Specific Comments
This section of the summary contains
the comments related to specific
documents.
Lender Narratives
A commenter made several comments
to the Lender Narratives to clarify
requirements and refine the questions.
Changes made in response to these
comments can be seen in the published
redlined versions of the documents.
Production Certifications—Consolidated
Certifications
Comment: Allow Electronic Filing of
Form 2530. A commenter suggested that
the consolidated certification forms be
revised to allow for electronic filing of
HUD Form 2530 Previous Participation
Certificates, instead of requiring paper
submissions.
HUD Response: HUD agrees and has
revised the language in the consolidated
certifications to better clarify that where
electronic submissions have been made,
paper filings are not required.
Performance Bond—Dual Obligee (HUD
92452–ORCF)
Payment Bond (HUD 92452–ORCF)
Offsite Bond: Dual Obligee (HUD
92479–ORCF)
Comment: Cap automatic increases of
the penal sum. A commenter stated that
Paragraph 3 of the Performance Bond
states that the obligation of the obligors
is increased by any approved increase in
E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM
14MRN1
16282
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 50 / Thursday, March 14, 2013 / Notices
the contract price, but that this
provision is problematic if it refers to
increases of the penal sum, or penalty
amount, of the bond. Namely, the
commenter stated concern that Federal
regulations limit the risk a surety
insurer can accept on a single bond
written to the federal government, after
crediting reinsurance and collateral, to
10% of its policy holder surplus (31
CFR 223.10 Limitation of risk). The
commenter stated that if HUD desires
that the penal sum be increased
commensurate with change orders,
automatic increases should be capped.
The commenter stated that the form
could include, for example, a provision
that permits an increase of the penal
sum, without consent of the surety, to
account for an aggregate increase of 15%
of the original contract price. The
commenter stated that increases above
this threshold would require surety
consent.
HUD Response: HUD has reviewed
these provisions and has found them to
be in compliance with all applicable
regulations. HUD notes that these
provisions are the same as those
currently in effect in the multifamily
program and that their inclusion has not
proven problematic in the multifamily
program context.
Addendum to Operating Lease (HUD–
91116–ORCF)
Comment: Make Operating Lease
Addendum Consistent with Master
Lease Addendum. The commenter
suggested adding several provisions
similar to provisions in the addendum
to the master lease, as also being
appropriate for this lease addendum.
HUD Response: HUD agrees in part
and has revised the document
accordingly.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Healthcare Facility Note (HUD 94001–
ORCF)
Comment: Revise the Late Charge
Requirements. The commenter stated
that although 24 CFR 200.88 was
revised in 2011 to change the time for
assessing late charges from 15 days to 10
days for multifamily housing, the
change does not apply to mortgages
insured under section 232. Since the
2012 Final 232 Rule did not address late
charges, pursuant to 24 CFR
200.88(a)(2), late charges may be
assessed on section 232 mortgages only
if a payment is more than 15 days in
arrears.
HUD Response: HUD agrees. It is
HUD’s intention to maintain the 15 day
time frame for section 232 transactions
and the note has been revised
accordingly.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Mar 13, 2013
Jkt 229001
Healthcare Regulatory Agreement—
Borrower (HUD 92466–ORCF)
revised section 26(e) to address the
commenter’s concerns.
Comment: Distributions Provisions
Should Limit Obligation to Restore
Negative Surplus Cash. With respect to
section 16(d), a commenter
recommended that the obligation to
restore a negative surplus cash situation
be limited to the amount required to
eliminate the deficiency (e.g., if $100.00
is distributed and a $1.00 negative
surplus cash position results, then a
$1.00 payment should rectify the
situation).
HUD Response: HUD agrees with the
comment, but has determined that the
language in the document already limits
such required restoration to the extent
that surplus cash is negative and no
revision to the document is necessary.
Comment: Eliminate HUD’s ability to
Mandate a Different Operator. A
commenter recommended that section
26(d) be revised by deleting the subclause that entitles HUD to mandate a
different operator if HUD determines
‘‘the financial viability of the Healthcare
Facility is in substantial and imminent
risk.’’ The commenter stated that this is
a subjective determination and should
be deleted. The commenter stated that if
the borrower is paying its loan
obligations, and the permits and
approvals are not at material risk, then
the borrower’s rights to continue to
operate the project should continue.
HUD Response: HUD disagrees with
the commenter and has determined that
appropriate oversight requires the
ability to take action if the project is in
substantial and imminent financial risk,
even if the borrower or its affiliates are
able to continue making loan payments
at such time.
Comment: Permit Operator to
Purchase a Facility. A commenter
objected to section 26(e) of the
operator’s regulatory agreement and
suggested that there may be
circumstances where HUD may consent
to the operator’s purchase of a facility.
The commenter stated that this could be
an important inducement for an
operator to take over a struggling
facility.
HUD Response: HUD agrees that there
may be circumstances where it is
appropriate to allow the operator to
purchase the facility. Nothing in the
regulatory agreement prohibits this kind
of transfer, with HUD’s consent. HUD
notes, however, that according to the
Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) certain provisions in a lease may
cause the lease to be classified as a
‘‘capital lease’’ which has undesirable
accounting consequences. HUD has
Healthcare Regulatory Agreement—
Operator (HUD 92466A)
Comment: Termination of Minor
Permits Should Not Trigger a Project
Operating Deficiency. The commenter
stated that the termination of a permit
not needed to operate a project (e.g., loss
of a curb cut permit where there are
other acceptable access points) should
not be treated as a Project Operating
Deficiency pursuant to section 6(a) of
the operator’s regulatory agreement.
HUD Response: HUD agrees with the
commenter’s concern and notes the
document uses a defined term when
referring to ‘‘permits and approvals.’’
The defined term ‘‘permits and
approvals’’ is used in the project
operating deficiencies provisions and
other provisions referring to ‘‘permits
and approvals.’’ The defined term is
already limited to include only those
permits and approvals reasonably
necessary to operate or fund operation
of the healthcare facility, so further
limitation is not necessary.
HUD also notes that in reviewing the
commenter’s concerns regarding permits
and approvals, HUD determined that the
provisions requiring operators to
provide notice to HUD and lender if the
Project is or may be in violation of any
of the permits and approvals or any
governmental requirements applicable
to the operation of the Healthcare
Facility were too broad and required
clarification. HUD has revised these
provisions in the operator’s regulatory
agreement, the borrower’s regulatory
agreement, and the management
certification. The revisions are shown in
the redlined drafts of these documents
posted on HUD’s Web site.
Comment: Audited Financials Should
be Required Only in an Event of Default.
A commenter stated that section 20
should be revised to limit HUD’s ability
to require audited financials at the
operator’s expense only in an event of
default.
HUD Response: HUD disagrees and
has determined that, given the other
oversight provisions in the documents,
proper oversight of operators does not
require audited financials in the normal
course, but that, as the document
reflects, if HUD has reason to believe
that an operator’s self-certified financial
statements are unreliable or otherwise
not compliant with program obligations,
proper oversight does require HUD to
request audited financial statements.
Comment: Revise the Definition of
Healthcare Facility Working Capital.
The commenter suggested revising the
definition of healthcare facility working
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM
14MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 50 / Thursday, March 14, 2013 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
capital. The commenter stated that
under Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles (GAAP), the portion of the
principal of any loan that is due within
one year is treated as a current liability.
The commenter stated that, therefore,
twelve total yearly principal payments
on the HUD-insured loan and, in many
cases, all or a substantial portion of any
accounts receivable financing, would be
treated as a current liability, creating an
unintended result. The commenter
proposed to exclude principal from the
calculation unless the principal is past
due.
HUD Response: HUD is not persuaded
that (a) current liabilities related to
accounts receivable financing are not
appropriately offset by current assets
(e.g., cash from the accounts receivable
lender as well as accounts receivable
themselves) and therefore properly
included in calculating working capital,
or that (b) it is inappropriate to include
the principal portion of other current
debt payment obligations (e.g., the
insured mortgage payments) in
calculating working capital (as GAAP
would prescribe). However, HUD notes
that the operator’s regulatory agreement,
consistent with the 2012 Final 232 Rule,
states that program obligations will
provide further clarification and details
on the required financial calculations,
as the need arises.
Healthcare Security Instrument (HUD–
94000–ORCF)
Comment: Require the FHA Lender to
sign the agreements. A commenter
stated that in order to enforce
affirmative obligations against a party
(such as the FHA lender or HUD), such
party must execute the loan document
in question. The commenter mentioned
the security instrument as an example,
stating that the lender should be
required to execute the security
instrument.
HUD Response: HUD agrees, in part.
With regard to the security instrument,
HUD neither requires nor prohibits
lender execution of this document. HUD
notes that, while legal conventions and
requirements vary from state to state, in
most instances it is not necessary for the
lender to execute a mortgage in order to
enforce it. To the extent the document
limits a lender’s right to enforce certain
provisions by establishing certain
process requirements or other
limitations, such as notice provisions,
such provisions do not require the
lender to execute the document in order
to be in force. The borrower simply
limits the rights it is granting to the
lender to the extent set forth in the
document. Nonetheless, HUD
recognizes that state-specific
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Mar 13, 2013
Jkt 229001
conventions or party-specific
negotiations may favor lender execution
of this document.
Operator Security Agreement (HUD–
92323–ORCF)
Comment: Revise Account Control
Agreement Requirements. Commenters
stated that provisions in paragraph 2(h)
relating to required control agreements
on deposit accounts are overly broad.
The commenter suggested clarifications
and limits on these provisions.
HUD Response: HUD has reviewed
these comments and has accepted some
comments, but has determined that
other changes are too broad. The
published redlined version of the
document reflects the revised language.
Comment: Do Not Record Account
Information. A commenter stated that
the operator’s cash management
structure attached as an exhibit to the
operator’s security agreement contains
sensitive information and should not be
recorded.
HUD Response: HUD agrees. The
Operator Security Agreement is not set
up for recording. Only the assignment of
rents, included as an attachment to this
form document, should be recorded.
The cash flow exhibit should not be
recorded.
Comment: Require the Lender to sign
the Security Agreement: The commenter
stated that the penultimate sentence of
paragraph (h) includes an affirmative
covenant of the lender that ‘‘unless a
default exists under this Agreement or
the Loan Documents, lender will not
provide notice under a DACA to the
depositary bank * * * that lender is
exercising rights of control in the
deposit accounts.’’ The commenter
stated that for that covenant to be
effective, the lender must be a signatory
to the Security Agreement.
HUD Response: HUD agrees. The
document is already set up for the
lender to sign.
Comment: Delete Syndication
Provisions. A commenter stated that
provisions in section 20(b)(vi) of the
operator’s security agreement, relating
to the syndication of an accounts
receivable loan, should be deleted as an
operator has no control over when or
whether its AR loan is syndicated.
HUD Response: HUD has revised this
provision to clarify that HUD is not
imposing syndication requirements, but
recognizing that syndicated accounts
receivable loans could run afoul of
HUD’s other requirements unless an
exception is provided in this section.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16283
Intercreditor Agreement (for AR
Financed Projects) (HUD–92322–ORCF)
Comment: Publish the Intercreditor
Agreement as a ‘‘Guide’’ Document
Only. A commenter stated that given the
unique requirements of each
transaction, the Intercreditor Agreement
(ICA) should be published in final form
as a ‘‘guide’’ only, not a required form.
HUD Response: Although HUD
recognizes the need for flexibility to
respond to deal-specific requirements,
HUD also recognizes the need for
increased standardization in the
healthcare program. HUD has
determined that the form ICA allows for
sufficient flexibility to address dealspecific concerns while also providing
standardized and reasonable
requirements.
Comment: Define the ICA as an ‘‘AR
Loan Document.’’ A commenter stated
that they do not understand why the
ICA is not considered an AR Loan
Document for purposes of the ICA. The
commenter stated that most AR lenders’
loan documents will provide that the
ICA is actually a crucial loan document,
borrowers’ adherence to which is key
for the AR lender’s continued funding of
the AR loan. The commenter
recommended that the ICA be
considered a ‘‘HUD Loan Document’’ for
those same reasons.
HUD Response: HUD disagrees with
the commenter. Nothing in the ICA
prohibits an accounts receivable lender
from receiving appropriate covenants
and representations from its borrowers
in its loan documents or enforcing those
covenants and representations. HUD is
concerned with the circular
enforceability of making the ICA a ‘‘loan
document’’ for purposes of its own
provisions. The ICA is meant to clarify
the rights and responsibilities between
the accounts receivable lender and the
FHA lender.
Comment: Allow Additional AR Loan
Obligations. A commenter stated that
they do not understand why an AR
lender may not have a lien, even if
subordinate, on collateral other than the
collateral as defined in the AR Lender
Priority Collateral. The commenter
stated that many AR lenders lend on the
strength of a package of collateral that
is much more inclusive than that set
forth in the AR ‘‘Lender Priority
Collateral’’ definition, even if they must
take subordinate positions on such
collateral. The commenter stated that if
an accounts receivable lender is willing
to accept the terms of the intercreditor
agreement and take a subordinate
position on such collateral, it is unclear
why HUD would not permit the same.
The commenter stated that allowing an
E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM
14MRN1
16284
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 50 / Thursday, March 14, 2013 / Notices
AR lender to take a subordinate position
on such collateral does not harm HUD
or the HUD lender’s position with
regard to the project or its operations.
HUD Response: HUD recognizes the
commenter’s concern but has
determined that negative experiences in
past practice require a limitation on
what obligations the project collateral
may secure. To address the commenter’s
concerns, HUD has provided bracketed
alternative language to this definition
that may allow additional obligations to
be secured by project collateral with
HUD consent.
Comment: Terms of AR Loan
Advances and Applications of Payment
Need Revision. A commenter suggested
that the terms and provisions of section
3.4 relating to the terms of AR loan
advances and how funds received are
applied should be revised to more
accurately reflect contemporary
arrangements and HUD requirements
and provide flexibility for dealspecifics.
HUD Response: HUD agrees and the
Intercreditor Agreement has been
revised to clarify the provisions, provide
alternate language and make this section
revisable on a deal-specific basis.
Master Lease Addendum (HUD 92221–
ORCF)
Comment: Specify the Healthcare
Facility Ownership of FF&E, and
Transfer of Personal Payments. A
commenter suggested that revisions are
necessary to the provisions regarding
fixtures, furnishings, and equipment in
section 9 of the addendum to the master
lease in order to make this document
consistent with the addendum to the
operating lease.
HUD Response: HUD agrees and has
revised this document accordingly.
Master Lease Subordination, NonDisturbance and Attornment Agreement.
(HUD–92333–ORCF)
Comment: Restore Recitals and
Execute Separate Subordination
Documents. A commenter stated that
there is a conceptual problem with this
document as drafted. The commenter
stated that accepted practice to date,
and a practice that the commenter
suggested continue, is that a separate
Master Lease Subordination, NonDisturbance and Attornment Agreement
(‘‘SNDA’’) be executed by the lender,
the Master Tenant, the applicable
borrower who owns the facility which is
securing the subject HUD Loan, and by
the Subtenant/Operator who operates
that facility, on a loan by loan basis. The
draft document contemplates all
Borrowers/Landlords and all
Subtenants/Operators execute the same
SNDA. That rarely, if ever, happens in
practice because most HUD portfolio
loans close over an extended period of
time, with borrowers added to a Master
Lease as the loan to each such borrower
closes, with each borrower, operator and
the Master Tenant then signing a
separate SNDA, as stated above. The
commenter stated that this proposed
form will not work in practice so the
commenter strongly urged the
restoration of the prior recitals
referencing ‘‘Other HUD Borrowers’’,
‘‘Other Subleases,’’ ‘‘Other Operators,’’
and ‘‘Other Mortgage Loans.’’
HUD Response: HUD recognizes the
commenter’s concerns but has
determined that the document works as
drafted. Since this addendum is an
addendum to the one master lease, there
should only be one addendum
containing the required provisions, and
additional parties can be added as
necessary.
Guide for Opinion of Borrower’s
Counsel (HUD–91725–ORCF)
Guide for Opinion of Operator’s
Counsel—Certification (HUD–92325–
ORCF)
Guide for Opinion of Master Tenants
Counsel Certification (HUD–92225–
ORCF)
Comment: Technical Revisions. A
commenter suggested several technical
revisions to these documents.
HUD Response: HUD agrees in part
and appropriate revisions are reflected
in the published redlined versions of
the documents.
As noted previously, these and all
other changes made in response to
comment are displayed in redline
format on HUD’s Web page, https://
www.hud.gov/232forms.
V. Transition
Use of the final approved documents
shall be implemented to correspond
with the applicability of the 2012 Final
232 Rule published in the Federal
Register on September 7, 2012 (FR
55120). As such, the following
documents (typically executed at the
closing stage of a transaction) shall be
submitted for any transaction that
receives a firm commitment on or after
April 9, 2013:
Additional ORCF Documents
HUD–91112–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92466–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92466A–ORCF .............................................
HUD–94000–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–94001–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–91710–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92223–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–91110–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92420–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–2205A–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92323–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–91116–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–9839–ORCF .................................................
Request of Overpayment of Firm Application Exam Fee.
Healthcare Regulatory Agreement—Borrower.
Healthcare Regulatory Agreement—Operator.
Security Instrument/Mortgage/Deed of Trust.
Healthcare Facility Note.
Residual Receipts Note—Non Profit Mortgagor.
Surplus Cash Note.
Subordination, Non-Disturbance and Attornment Agreement of Operating Lease (SNDA).
Subordination Agreement—Financing.
Borrower’s Certificate of Actual Cost.
Operator Security Agreement.
Addendum to Operating Lease.
Management Certification—Residential Care Facility.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Production Certifications
HUD–91118–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92434–ORCF ...............................................
Borrower’s Certification—Completion of Critical Repairs.
Lender Certification.
Additional Legal Documents
HUD–91117–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–91725–INST–ORCF .....................................
HUD–91725–CERT–ORCF ...................................
HUD–91725–ORCF ...............................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Mar 13, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Operator Estoppel Certificate.
Instructions to Guide for Opinion of Borrower’s and Operator’s Counsel.
Exhibit A to Opinion of Borrower’s Counsel—Certification.
Guide for Opinion of Borrower’s Counsel.
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM
14MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 50 / Thursday, March 14, 2013 / Notices
HUD–92325–ORCF ...............................................
16285
Guide for Opinion of Operator’s Counsel and Certification.
Escrow Documents
HUD–91128–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92414–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–9443–ORCF .................................................
HUD–92476–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92476B–ORCF .............................................
Initial Operating Deficit Escrow Calculation Template.
Latent Defects Escrow.
Minor Moveable Escrow.
Escrow Agreement Noncritical Deferred Repairs.
Escrow Agreement for Operating Deficits.
Construction Documents
HUD–91123–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–93305–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92441–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92441a-ORCF ..............................................
HUD–92450–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92442–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92554–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92479–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92452–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92452A–ORCF .............................................
HUD–92455–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92412–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–9442–ORCF .................................................
HUD–92415–ORCF ...............................................
Design Professional’s Certification of Liability Insurance.
Agreement and Certification.
Building Loan Agreement.
Building Loan Agreement Supplemental.
Completion Assurance.
Construction Contract.
Supplementary Conditions of the Contract for Construction.
Offsite Bond—Dual Obligee.
Performance Bond—Dual Obligee.
Payment Bond.
Request for Endorsement.
Working Capital Escrow.
Memo for Post-Commitment Early Start of Construction Request.
Request for Permission to Commence Construction Prior to Initial Endorsement for Mortgage
Insurance (Post-Commitment Early Start of Construction).
Accounts Receivable Documents
HUD–90020–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92322–ORCF ...............................................
A/R Financing Certification.
Intercreditor Agreement (for AR Financed Projects).
Master Lease Documents
HUD–92211–ORCF
HUD–92331–ORCF
HUD–92333–ORCF
HUD–92335–ORCF
HUD–92337–ORCF
HUD–92339–ORCF
HUD–92340–ORCF
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
The other final approved documents,
as and when required, shall be used
Master Lease Addendum.
Cross-Default Guaranty of Subtenants.
Master Lease SNDA.
Guide for Opinion of Master Tenant’s Counsel.
Healthcare Regulatory Agreement—Master Tenant.
Master Lease Estoppel Agreement.
Master Tenant Security Agreement.
beginning July 12, 2013. These
documents include the following:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Lender Narratives
HUD–9001–ORCF .................................................
HUD–9001a-ORCF ................................................
HUD–9001b-ORCF ................................................
HUD–9001c-ORCF ................................................
HUD–9001d-ORCF ................................................
HUD–9001e-ORCF ................................................
HUD–9001f-ORCF .................................................
HUD–9001g-ORCF ................................................
HUD–9001h-ORCF ................................................
HUD–9001i-ORCF .................................................
HUD–9002–ORCF .................................................
HUD–9003–ORCF .................................................
HUD–9004–ORCF .................................................
HUD–9005–ORCF .................................................
HUD–9005a-ORCF ................................................
HUD–9006–ORCF .................................................
HUD–9007–ORCF .................................................
HUD–9007a-ORCF ................................................
HUD–9008–ORCF .................................................
HUD–90025–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–90025a-ORCF ..............................................
HUD–9009–ORCF .................................................
HUD–90010–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–90011–ORCF ...............................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Mar 13, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Lender Narrative 223a7—Main.
Lender Narrative 223a7—Addenda—PCNA.
Lender Narrative 223a7.223d.232i—Addendum—ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey.
Lender Narrative 223a7—Addendum—Environmental.
Lender Narrative 223a7—Addendum—Other Existing Eligible Indebtedness.
Lender Narrative 223a7.223d.232i—Addendum—Principal of Borrower.
Lender Narrative 223a7.223d.232i—Addendum—Operator.
Lender Narrative 223a7.223d.232i—Addendum—Management Agent.
Lender Narrative 223a7.223d.232i—Addendum—Transfer of Physical Assets.
Lender Narrative 223a7.223d.232i—Addendum—AR Financing.
Lender Narrative 223f.
Lender Narrative 241a.
Lender Narrative—New Construction—Single Stage.
Lender Narrative—New Construction—2 Stage Initial Submittal.
Lender Narrative—New Construction—2 Stage Final Submittal.
Lender Narrative—Substantial Rehabilitation—Single Stage.
Lender Narrative—Substantial Rehabilitation—2 Stage Initial Submittal.
Lender Narrative—Substantial Rehabilitation—2 Stage Final Submittal.
Lender Narrative—Blended Rate—Single Stage.
Lender Narrative—Blended Rate—2 Stage—Initial Submittal.
Lender Narrative—Blended Rate—2 Stage—Final Submittal.
Lender Narrative 232(i)—Fire Safety Equipment Installation, without Existing HUD Insured
Mortgage.
Lender Narrative 232(i)—Fire Safety Equipment Installation, with Existing HUD Insured Mortgage.
Lender Narrative 223(d)—Operating Loss Loan.
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM
14MRN1
16286
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 50 / Thursday, March 14, 2013 / Notices
HUD–9444–ORCF .................................................
Lender Narrative Cost Certification Supplement.
Production Certifications
HUD–90012–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–90013–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–90014–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–90015–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–90016–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–90017–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–90018–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–90019–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–90022–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–91130–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–9445–ORCF .................................................
Consolidated Certification—Lender.
Consolidated Certification—Borrower.
Consolidated Certification—Principal of the Borrower.
Consolidated Certification—Operator.
Consolidated Certification—Parent of Operator.
Consolidated Certification—Management Agent.
Consolidated Certification—Contractors.
Auditor Certification.
Certification for Electronic Submittal.
Building Code Certification.
Certification of Outstanding Obligations.
Additional ORCF Documents
HUD–91708–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92576A–ORCF .............................................
HUD–90024–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–91126–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–941–ORCF ...................................................
HUD–92264a-ORCF ..............................................
HUD–2–ORCF .......................................................
HUD–91119–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–91111–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92070–ORCF ...............................................
Agreement for Payment of Real Property Taxes.
Certificate of Need for Health Facility.
Contact Sheet.
Financial Statement Certification.
Lenders FHA Number Request Form.
Maximum Insurable Loan Calculation.
Request for Waiver of Housing Directive.
Schedule of Facilities Owned Operated or Managed.
Survey Instructions and Borrower’s Certification.
Lease Addendum.
Escrow Documents
HUD–92464–ORCF ...............................................
Request Approval Advance of Escrow Funds.
Construction Documents
HUD–91124–ORCF
HUD–91127–ORCF
HUD–92408–ORCF
HUD–91125–ORCF
HUD–95379–ORCF
HUD–91129–ORCF
HUD–92456–ORCF
HUD–92023–ORCF
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
...............................................
Design Architect Certification.
Financial Statement Certification—General Contractor.
HUD Amendment to B108.
Staffing Schedule.
HUD Representative’s Trip Report.
Lender Certification for New Construction Cost Certifications.
Escrow Agreement for Incomplete Construction.
Request for Final Endorsement.
Asset Management Documents
HUD–92266–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–93332–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–93333–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–93486–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–9250–ORCF .................................................
HUD–9250A–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92228–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92117–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–92417–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–93479–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–93480–ORCF ...............................................
HUD–93481–ORCF ...............................................
Application for Transfer of Physical Assets (TPA).
Certification of Exigent Health & Safety (EH&S) Issues.
Certification Physical Condition in Compliance.
Computation of Surplus Cash.
Funds Authorizations.
Borrower Certification and Request Detail.
Model Form Bill of Sale and Assignment.
Borrower’s Certification—Completion of Non-Critical Repairs.
Personal Financial and Credit Statement.
Monthly Report for Establishing Net Income.
Schedule of Disbursements.
Schedule of Accounts Payable.
Dated: March 8, 2013.
Carol J. Galante,
Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal
Housing Commissioner.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
ACTION:
Fish and Wildlife Service
SUMMARY:
[FR Doc. 2013–05826 Filed 3–13–13; 8:45 am]
[FWS–R3–R–2012–N262; FXRS1265030000–
134–FF03R06000]
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge,
Jasper County, IA; Final
Comprehensive Conservation Plan and
Finding of No Significant Impact for
Environmental Assessment
AGENCY:
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Mar 13, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Notice of availability.
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of a final comprehensive
conservation plan (CCP) and finding of
no significant impact (FONSI) for the
Environmental Assessment (EA) for
Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge
(Refuge, NWR). In this final CCP, we
describe how we intend to manage the
refuge for the next 15 years.
You will find the final CCP,
a summary of the final CCP, and the EA/
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM
14MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 50 (Thursday, March 14, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16279-16286]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05826]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR-5623-N-03]
HUD Healthcare Facility Documents: Notice Announcing Final
Approved Documents and Assignment of OMB Control Number
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces that the healthcare facility documents
have completed the notice and comment processes and review by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act, and that OMB has assigned a control number to the
documents. The final versions of the documents can be found on HUD's
Web site at www.hud.gov/232forms. Additionally, this notice highlights
some of the changes made by HUD to the documents based upon its review
of the comments submitted in response to a November 21, 2012 notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roger Miller, Deputy Assistant
Secretary, Office of Healthcare Programs, Office of Housing, Department
of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 6264,
Washington, DC 20410-0500; telephone number 202-708-0599 (this is not a
toll-free number). Persons with speech or hearing impairments may
access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal
Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On May 3, 2012 (77 FR 26304) and consistent with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), HUD published for public comment, for a
period of 60 days, a notice (60-day Notice) advising that HUD was
updating and revising a set of production, underwriting, asset
management, closing, and other documents used in connection with
transactions involving healthcare facilities, excluding hospitals, that
are insured pursuant to section 232 of the National Housing Act
(Section 232). These documents are referred to collectively as the
healthcare facility documents. The 60-day Notice followed adoption of
updates and revisions to documents used for FHA's multifamily programs,
and initiated the public review process for obtaining approval of
changes to these specific healthcare facility documents under the PRA.
In conjunction with publication of the 60-day Notice, the proposed
revised healthcare facility documents were made available at:
www.hud.gov/232forms.
Along with the 60-day Notice, HUD also published on May 3, 2012, at
77 FR 26218, a proposed rule that proposed to strengthen regulations
for HUD's Section 232 program to reflect current policy and practices,
and to improve accountability and strengthen risk management. A final
rule following the May 3, 2012, proposed rule, and taking into
consideration public comment received on the proposed rule, was
published on September 7, 2012, at 77 FR 55120 (2012 Final 232 Rule).
As a special outreach to the public on proposed changes to the
Section 232 program regulations, HUD hosted a forum, the ``Section 232
Document and Proposed Rule Forum'' on May 31, 2012, in Washington, DC.
A video of this forum is available on the HUD Web site at https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/press/multimedia/videos. While
comments were raised and discussed at the forum, as reflected in the
video, HUD encouraged forum participants to file written comments
through the www.regulations.gov Web site so that all comments would be
more easily accessible to interested parties. All comments, whether
submitted through www.regulations.gov or raised at the forum, were
considered in the development of the revised documents which were
published on November 21, 2012 (77 FR 69870), and for which, consistent
with the PRA, comment was solicited for an additional 30 days.
In the 30-day PRA notice published on November 21, 2012 (77 FR
69870) (30-day Notice) HUD identified substantive changes that were
made to the healthcare facility documents in response to public
comments submitted on the 60-day Notice, responded to significant
issues raised by the commenters, and identified proposed additional
changes based on further consideration of certain issues. All the
public comments submitted on the proposed updated documents were
available for review on www.regulations.gov, and a HUD web page
included proposed mark-ups of the documents. The documents can be found
on HUD's Web site at: www.hud.gov/232forms.
This notice published today announces that HUD has completed the
notice and comment processes required by the PRA, and that OMB has
completed its review and has assigned an OMB control number 2502-0605
to the documents. HUD made additional changes to the documents in
response to comments submitted on the 30-day Notice. Therefore, in
addition to announcing the completion of the process required by the
PRA and the assignment of the OMB control number, HUD highlights some
of the additional changes made to the healthcare facility documents
(documents) in response to public comment as provided below.
II. Status of Changes to Documents
In response to comments that were received on the 60-day Notice and
the 30-day Notice, HUD made a number of revisions to the documents. The
changes to these documents include both technical editorial changes and
some more substantive changes.
This notice does not provide a detailed summary of all of the
changes made or responses to all of the issues raised in the final set
of public comments on the 30-day Notice. Rather, the discussion in the
following sections
[[Page 16280]]
of this notice highlights certain changes which are representative of
the types of changes made in response to some of the more significant
issues raised by the commenters in response to the 30-day Notice and
the accompanying documents posted on HUD's Web site. In this notice,
HUD is not repeating responses to all the proposed changes or issues
that were addressed in the prior notices. The final versions of the
documents and the redlined versions which detail specific changes to
the documents posted in connection with the 30-day Notice are available
on HUD's Web site: www.hud.gov/232forms.
Please also note that commenters have varied their references to
specific provisions in the documents; sometimes the commenters referred
to the provision in the healthcare facility document as sections,
subsections, and paragraphs. Efforts have been made to track and
maintain those references in this notice.
III. Selected Policy Determinations
Some of the changes suggested to the documents by the commenters on
the 30-day Notice were similar to changes suggested by commenters on
the 60-day Notice, and were already addressed by HUD in the 30-day
Notice. Further, the redlined and final documents posted on HUD's Web
site in conjunction with this final notice detail all of the changes
HUD made in response to the points made by the commenters. Therefore
the changes discussed below highlight, in a comment and response
format, a summary of areas where HUD has made significant policy or
other substantive determinations.
IV. The Public Comments
A. The Commenters
The public comment period for the 30-day Notice closed on December
21, 2012, and public comments were received from 5 sets of commenters
(some individuals, some a group of individuals, each set referred to in
this notice as a ``commenter''). Comments were submitted by
associations representing surety bond insurance companies, mortgage
bankers, accounts receivable (AR) lenders, lenders specializing in HUD
programs, and private practice attorneys.
All comments were carefully considered by HUD prior to presentation
to OMB for final approval and assignment of a control number under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
B. General Recommendations
This section of the summary includes summaries of ``cross-cutting''
issues that were emphasized in commenters' summaries.
Comment: Treatment of Non-Profit Borrowers. One comment stated that
HUD is deviating from long-standing HUD policy with respect to non-
profit borrowers, and recommended that HUD reconsider revising
provisions in the Healthcare Regulatory Agreement--Borrower
(``Borrower's Regulatory Agreement'') regarding non-profit borrowers.
The commenter stated that under the proposed Borrower's Regulatory
Agreement, all non-profit borrowers will be required to maintain a
residual receipts account that essentially amounts to a long-term debt
service escrow merely because they are non-profit entities. The
commenter stated that such a requirement should be waived if in all
other respects, the non-profit is being treated the same as a for-
profit borrower, not benefiting at all from its non-profit status. The
commenter stated that it is counter to HUD's mission for HUD to treat
non-profit borrowers disadvantageously solely because they are non-
profit entities.
HUD Response: The commenter is not correct that the proposed
Borrower's Regulatory Agreement deviates from long-standing HUD policy.
It is well-established, long-standing HUD policy in both the healthcare
and multifamily programs to require non-profit borrowers to maintain
residual receipts accounts rather than allowing non-profit borrowers to
make distributions of surplus cash. Although the policy for healthcare
program transactions is different than the policy for multifamily
program transactions, it is also long-standing HUD policy for both
programs to provide some limits, waivers and exceptions to this general
policy. The commenter's concerns relate to these limits, waivers and
exceptions. In the healthcare program, the extent of and the conditions
required for these limits, waivers, and exceptions has been evolving
for many years. The healthcare program policy regarding non-profits
documented in the proposed Borrower's Regulatory Agreement had been
widely used prior to the publication of the 30-day Notice, but had also
been frequently waived or modified, as may have been negotiated on a
deal-specific basis. The proposed provisions in the Borrower's
Regulatory Agreement attempted to document and standardize this policy
nationwide and program-wide. Upon consideration of the commenter's
comments, HUD has further clarified these provisions. For example, HUD
has provided instruction in the document that where a non-profit
borrower is seeking to re-finance HUD-insured debt under Section
223(a)(7), and the non-profit borrower's current regulatory agreement
identifies the borrower as a for-profit borrower, HUD will continue to
identify the borrower as a for-profit borrower for purposes of the
borrower's regulatory agreement.
Comment: HUD should differentiate between Affiliated and
Unaffiliated Operators. A commenter stated that HUD must differentiate
between operators who have an ``identity of interest'' with the HUD
borrower (an ``affiliated operator'') and operators who have no
identity of interest with the HUD borrower (an ``unaffiliated
operator''). The commenter stated that a non-affiliated operator will
be extraordinarily reluctant to follow HUD's requirements as set forth
in the documents, as typically, an unaffiliated operator would have
little, if any, incentive to subject itself and its assets to its
landlord's loan liabilities. The commenter stated that these issues
would be most pronounced for the unaffiliated operators in the security
agreements required of the master tenant and of the operator, the
master tenant's and operator's regulatory agreements, and the
Subordination, Non-Disturbance and Attornment Agreement (SNDA). The
commenter recommended that FHA create a separate set of these and other
form documents for unaffiliated operators.
HUD Response: HUD has considered these comments carefully, but as a
policy matter at this time has decided generally to not differentiate
between affiliated and unaffiliated operators. HUD has determined that
the policies regarding operators in the documents reflect reasonable
and sound business practices, and reasonable and necessary oversight,
regardless of the affiliation, if any, between the operator and the
borrower. HUD believes that most operators (whether or not affiliated
with the borrower), upon careful consideration, will find the
provisions reasonable, but HUD also recognizes that some unaffiliated
operators may not agree with this policy choice and may choose not to
participate in HUD programs as a result. However, HUD has determined
that, at this time, the need to establish clearer and more direct
oversight over operators outweighs this potential effect. HUD also
notes that, to limit decreases in unaffiliated operator participation,
unaffiliated operators have been given greater rights than affiliated
operators through the SNDA, as demonstrated in the SNDA published in
connection with the 30-day Notice.
Comment: Security of Obligations. Multiple commenters stated that,
in various documents, the obligations
[[Page 16281]]
secured by pledges of the operator and/or the master tenant should be
limited to direct obligations of the operator and/or master tenant
under documents to which each is a party, respectively, rather than the
borrower's obligations under the Loan Documents.
HUD Response: HUD disagrees. HUD's approach to the healthcare
programs is and has always been holistic, to oversee and assess the
entire project, not merely to provide mortgage insurance for a real
estate transaction. HUD has a strong interest in the viable operation
of the healthcare facility and regards all funds derived from the
operation of the healthcare facility as project funds, pursuant to 24
CFR 232.1005.
Comment: Project Operating Deficiencies must be revised and must
not be deemed ``Events of Default''. A commenter stated that HUD should
revise its definition of ``project operating deficiencies'' in various
documents, including regulatory agreements and the SNDA, and that HUD
should clarify that project operating deficiencies shall not be deemed
an ``event of default'' under those documents. The commenter also
stated that operators have already objected to the ``project operating
deficiencies'' provisions included in the SNDA form currently in use,
and that well-established operators will be unwilling to subject
themselves to these provisions only to cooperate with their landlords
in obtaining HUD-insured financing. The commenter stated that this is
the case for both affiliated and unaffiliated operators. The commenter
stated that there should be no subjective determinants of what
constitutes a project operating deficiency and that the occurrence of a
project operating deficiency should not constitute an event of default
entitling HUD or the lender to terminate an operator's lease or replace
the operator. The commenter recommended that HUD allow an operator that
is otherwise paying rent under the lease, for so long as there is no
material risk of termination of the operator's necessary permits and
approvals, to continue to operate and address its problems.
HUD Response: HUD agrees with the commenter in part and disagrees
in part. HUD agrees that the criteria for what constitutes a project
operating deficiency should not be subjective, and has determined that
the criteria are objective, fair, and reasonable. HUD also agrees that
the purpose of recognizing a project operating deficiency is to
identify a struggling project before the project fails and an event of
default is declared, and to consider the use of a consultant as one
potential tool to avert an event of default. Therefore, HUD agrees that
the occurrence of a project operating deficiency, in and of itself,
does not constitute an event of default and believes nothing in the
documents indicates otherwise. Moreover, HUD notes that, as a mortgage
insurer, HUD's incentives are not aligned with calling a default on
either the operator or the borrower when doing so could prompt an
otherwise avoidable claim.
Comment: Revise Timeframes for Cure Rights and Cure Periods. A
commenter recommended that HUD allow reasonable timeframes for curing
events of default under the documents. The commenter stated that where
a borrower or operator is granted a 30-day cure period, as a matter of
course, that 30-day cure period should be extended so long as the
defaulting party commences to cure within 30 days and diligently
pursues the cure to completion. The commenter stated that a limitation
on that extended cure period during material risks of termination of
necessary permits and approvals or payment defaults, however, is
reasonable.
HUD Response: HUD has carefully considered this comment and has
determined that, although most cure period provisions set forth in the
documents are appropriate and include extensions where appropriate, the
cure period in the operator's security agreement should include an
extension similar to the cure period in the operator's regulatory
agreement, and has revised the document to include such extension.
Comment: Make the Lender a Third-Party Beneficiary to the
Regulatory Agreements. A commenter stated that the FHA lender should be
a third-party beneficiary of borrowers', master tenants', and
operators' obligations under their respective regulatory agreements.
The commenter stated that the lender's ability to exercise HUD's rights
in those documents benefits HUD because it gives the lender an
alternative recovery source other than assigning the loan to HUD.
HUD Response: HUD has determined that it is not appropriate for the
lender to be a third-party beneficiary to the regulatory agreements.
The lender's rights with respect to the borrower are set forth in the
other loan documents and the lender has adequate ability pursuant to
the loan documents to pursue the borrower for violations of its
covenants and of program obligations.
Comment: Regulatory Agreement Defaults should be Defaults under the
Security Agreements. A commenter stated that any default of either the
regulatory agreements should result in a default of the respective
security agreement or security instrument, without the separate need
for HUD consent to such treatment. The commenter stated that this
revision would provide lenders with increased ability to remedy
defaults without assigning loans to HUD.
HUD Response: Consistent with the determinations HUD made with
regard to the multifamily program, HUD has determined that defaults of
the regulatory agreements should not constitute defaults under the
other loan documents without HUD's consent. While the other loan
documents set forth the lenders' rights with respect to the borrower,
the regulatory agreement is a HUD-driven document. Contrary to the
commenter's assertions, HUD has determined that allowing the lender to
call an event of default under the other loan documents for regulatory
agreement defaults without HUD consent increases and facilitates the
lenders' ability to assign the defaulting loan to HUD, increasing HUD's
risk and exposure.
C. Document Specific Comments
This section of the summary contains the comments related to
specific documents.
Lender Narratives
A commenter made several comments to the Lender Narratives to
clarify requirements and refine the questions. Changes made in response
to these comments can be seen in the published redlined versions of the
documents.
Production Certifications--Consolidated Certifications
Comment: Allow Electronic Filing of Form 2530. A commenter
suggested that the consolidated certification forms be revised to allow
for electronic filing of HUD Form 2530 Previous Participation
Certificates, instead of requiring paper submissions.
HUD Response: HUD agrees and has revised the language in the
consolidated certifications to better clarify that where electronic
submissions have been made, paper filings are not required.
Performance Bond--Dual Obligee (HUD 92452-ORCF)
Payment Bond (HUD 92452-ORCF)
Offsite Bond: Dual Obligee (HUD 92479-ORCF)
Comment: Cap automatic increases of the penal sum. A commenter
stated that Paragraph 3 of the Performance Bond states that the
obligation of the obligors is increased by any approved increase in
[[Page 16282]]
the contract price, but that this provision is problematic if it refers
to increases of the penal sum, or penalty amount, of the bond. Namely,
the commenter stated concern that Federal regulations limit the risk a
surety insurer can accept on a single bond written to the federal
government, after crediting reinsurance and collateral, to 10% of its
policy holder surplus (31 CFR 223.10 Limitation of risk). The commenter
stated that if HUD desires that the penal sum be increased commensurate
with change orders, automatic increases should be capped. The commenter
stated that the form could include, for example, a provision that
permits an increase of the penal sum, without consent of the surety, to
account for an aggregate increase of 15% of the original contract
price. The commenter stated that increases above this threshold would
require surety consent.
HUD Response: HUD has reviewed these provisions and has found them
to be in compliance with all applicable regulations. HUD notes that
these provisions are the same as those currently in effect in the
multifamily program and that their inclusion has not proven problematic
in the multifamily program context.
Addendum to Operating Lease (HUD-91116-ORCF)
Comment: Make Operating Lease Addendum Consistent with Master Lease
Addendum. The commenter suggested adding several provisions similar to
provisions in the addendum to the master lease, as also being
appropriate for this lease addendum.
HUD Response: HUD agrees in part and has revised the document
accordingly.
Healthcare Facility Note (HUD 94001-ORCF)
Comment: Revise the Late Charge Requirements. The commenter stated
that although 24 CFR 200.88 was revised in 2011 to change the time for
assessing late charges from 15 days to 10 days for multifamily housing,
the change does not apply to mortgages insured under section 232. Since
the 2012 Final 232 Rule did not address late charges, pursuant to 24
CFR 200.88(a)(2), late charges may be assessed on section 232 mortgages
only if a payment is more than 15 days in arrears.
HUD Response: HUD agrees. It is HUD's intention to maintain the 15
day time frame for section 232 transactions and the note has been
revised accordingly.
Healthcare Regulatory Agreement--Borrower (HUD 92466-ORCF)
Comment: Distributions Provisions Should Limit Obligation to
Restore Negative Surplus Cash. With respect to section 16(d), a
commenter recommended that the obligation to restore a negative surplus
cash situation be limited to the amount required to eliminate the
deficiency (e.g., if $100.00 is distributed and a $1.00 negative
surplus cash position results, then a $1.00 payment should rectify the
situation).
HUD Response: HUD agrees with the comment, but has determined that
the language in the document already limits such required restoration
to the extent that surplus cash is negative and no revision to the
document is necessary.
Comment: Eliminate HUD's ability to Mandate a Different Operator. A
commenter recommended that section 26(d) be revised by deleting the
sub-clause that entitles HUD to mandate a different operator if HUD
determines ``the financial viability of the Healthcare Facility is in
substantial and imminent risk.'' The commenter stated that this is a
subjective determination and should be deleted. The commenter stated
that if the borrower is paying its loan obligations, and the permits
and approvals are not at material risk, then the borrower's rights to
continue to operate the project should continue.
HUD Response: HUD disagrees with the commenter and has determined
that appropriate oversight requires the ability to take action if the
project is in substantial and imminent financial risk, even if the
borrower or its affiliates are able to continue making loan payments at
such time.
Comment: Permit Operator to Purchase a Facility. A commenter
objected to section 26(e) of the operator's regulatory agreement and
suggested that there may be circumstances where HUD may consent to the
operator's purchase of a facility. The commenter stated that this could
be an important inducement for an operator to take over a struggling
facility.
HUD Response: HUD agrees that there may be circumstances where it
is appropriate to allow the operator to purchase the facility. Nothing
in the regulatory agreement prohibits this kind of transfer, with HUD's
consent. HUD notes, however, that according to the Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB) certain provisions in a lease may cause the
lease to be classified as a ``capital lease'' which has undesirable
accounting consequences. HUD has revised section 26(e) to address the
commenter's concerns.
Healthcare Regulatory Agreement--Operator (HUD 92466A)
Comment: Termination of Minor Permits Should Not Trigger a Project
Operating Deficiency. The commenter stated that the termination of a
permit not needed to operate a project (e.g., loss of a curb cut permit
where there are other acceptable access points) should not be treated
as a Project Operating Deficiency pursuant to section 6(a) of the
operator's regulatory agreement.
HUD Response: HUD agrees with the commenter's concern and notes the
document uses a defined term when referring to ``permits and
approvals.'' The defined term ``permits and approvals'' is used in the
project operating deficiencies provisions and other provisions
referring to ``permits and approvals.'' The defined term is already
limited to include only those permits and approvals reasonably
necessary to operate or fund operation of the healthcare facility, so
further limitation is not necessary.
HUD also notes that in reviewing the commenter's concerns regarding
permits and approvals, HUD determined that the provisions requiring
operators to provide notice to HUD and lender if the Project is or may
be in violation of any of the permits and approvals or any governmental
requirements applicable to the operation of the Healthcare Facility
were too broad and required clarification. HUD has revised these
provisions in the operator's regulatory agreement, the borrower's
regulatory agreement, and the management certification. The revisions
are shown in the redlined drafts of these documents posted on HUD's Web
site.
Comment: Audited Financials Should be Required Only in an Event of
Default. A commenter stated that section 20 should be revised to limit
HUD's ability to require audited financials at the operator's expense
only in an event of default.
HUD Response: HUD disagrees and has determined that, given the
other oversight provisions in the documents, proper oversight of
operators does not require audited financials in the normal course, but
that, as the document reflects, if HUD has reason to believe that an
operator's self-certified financial statements are unreliable or
otherwise not compliant with program obligations, proper oversight does
require HUD to request audited financial statements.
Comment: Revise the Definition of Healthcare Facility Working
Capital. The commenter suggested revising the definition of healthcare
facility working
[[Page 16283]]
capital. The commenter stated that under Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles (GAAP), the portion of the principal of any loan that is due
within one year is treated as a current liability. The commenter stated
that, therefore, twelve total yearly principal payments on the HUD-
insured loan and, in many cases, all or a substantial portion of any
accounts receivable financing, would be treated as a current liability,
creating an unintended result. The commenter proposed to exclude
principal from the calculation unless the principal is past due.
HUD Response: HUD is not persuaded that (a) current liabilities
related to accounts receivable financing are not appropriately offset
by current assets (e.g., cash from the accounts receivable lender as
well as accounts receivable themselves) and therefore properly included
in calculating working capital, or that (b) it is inappropriate to
include the principal portion of other current debt payment obligations
(e.g., the insured mortgage payments) in calculating working capital
(as GAAP would prescribe). However, HUD notes that the operator's
regulatory agreement, consistent with the 2012 Final 232 Rule, states
that program obligations will provide further clarification and details
on the required financial calculations, as the need arises.
Healthcare Security Instrument (HUD-94000-ORCF)
Comment: Require the FHA Lender to sign the agreements. A commenter
stated that in order to enforce affirmative obligations against a party
(such as the FHA lender or HUD), such party must execute the loan
document in question. The commenter mentioned the security instrument
as an example, stating that the lender should be required to execute
the security instrument.
HUD Response: HUD agrees, in part. With regard to the security
instrument, HUD neither requires nor prohibits lender execution of this
document. HUD notes that, while legal conventions and requirements vary
from state to state, in most instances it is not necessary for the
lender to execute a mortgage in order to enforce it. To the extent the
document limits a lender's right to enforce certain provisions by
establishing certain process requirements or other limitations, such as
notice provisions, such provisions do not require the lender to execute
the document in order to be in force. The borrower simply limits the
rights it is granting to the lender to the extent set forth in the
document. Nonetheless, HUD recognizes that state-specific conventions
or party-specific negotiations may favor lender execution of this
document.
Operator Security Agreement (HUD-92323-ORCF)
Comment: Revise Account Control Agreement Requirements. Commenters
stated that provisions in paragraph 2(h) relating to required control
agreements on deposit accounts are overly broad. The commenter
suggested clarifications and limits on these provisions.
HUD Response: HUD has reviewed these comments and has accepted some
comments, but has determined that other changes are too broad. The
published redlined version of the document reflects the revised
language.
Comment: Do Not Record Account Information. A commenter stated that
the operator's cash management structure attached as an exhibit to the
operator's security agreement contains sensitive information and should
not be recorded.
HUD Response: HUD agrees. The Operator Security Agreement is not
set up for recording. Only the assignment of rents, included as an
attachment to this form document, should be recorded. The cash flow
exhibit should not be recorded.
Comment: Require the Lender to sign the Security Agreement: The
commenter stated that the penultimate sentence of paragraph (h)
includes an affirmative covenant of the lender that ``unless a default
exists under this Agreement or the Loan Documents, lender will not
provide notice under a DACA to the depositary bank * * * that lender is
exercising rights of control in the deposit accounts.'' The commenter
stated that for that covenant to be effective, the lender must be a
signatory to the Security Agreement.
HUD Response: HUD agrees. The document is already set up for the
lender to sign.
Comment: Delete Syndication Provisions. A commenter stated that
provisions in section 20(b)(vi) of the operator's security agreement,
relating to the syndication of an accounts receivable loan, should be
deleted as an operator has no control over when or whether its AR loan
is syndicated.
HUD Response: HUD has revised this provision to clarify that HUD is
not imposing syndication requirements, but recognizing that syndicated
accounts receivable loans could run afoul of HUD's other requirements
unless an exception is provided in this section.
Intercreditor Agreement (for AR Financed Projects) (HUD-92322-ORCF)
Comment: Publish the Intercreditor Agreement as a ``Guide''
Document Only. A commenter stated that given the unique requirements of
each transaction, the Intercreditor Agreement (ICA) should be published
in final form as a ``guide'' only, not a required form.
HUD Response: Although HUD recognizes the need for flexibility to
respond to deal-specific requirements, HUD also recognizes the need for
increased standardization in the healthcare program. HUD has determined
that the form ICA allows for sufficient flexibility to address deal-
specific concerns while also providing standardized and reasonable
requirements.
Comment: Define the ICA as an ``AR Loan Document.'' A commenter
stated that they do not understand why the ICA is not considered an AR
Loan Document for purposes of the ICA. The commenter stated that most
AR lenders' loan documents will provide that the ICA is actually a
crucial loan document, borrowers' adherence to which is key for the AR
lender's continued funding of the AR loan. The commenter recommended
that the ICA be considered a ``HUD Loan Document'' for those same
reasons.
HUD Response: HUD disagrees with the commenter. Nothing in the ICA
prohibits an accounts receivable lender from receiving appropriate
covenants and representations from its borrowers in its loan documents
or enforcing those covenants and representations. HUD is concerned with
the circular enforceability of making the ICA a ``loan document'' for
purposes of its own provisions. The ICA is meant to clarify the rights
and responsibilities between the accounts receivable lender and the FHA
lender.
Comment: Allow Additional AR Loan Obligations. A commenter stated
that they do not understand why an AR lender may not have a lien, even
if subordinate, on collateral other than the collateral as defined in
the AR Lender Priority Collateral. The commenter stated that many AR
lenders lend on the strength of a package of collateral that is much
more inclusive than that set forth in the AR ``Lender Priority
Collateral'' definition, even if they must take subordinate positions
on such collateral. The commenter stated that if an accounts receivable
lender is willing to accept the terms of the intercreditor agreement
and take a subordinate position on such collateral, it is unclear why
HUD would not permit the same. The commenter stated that allowing an
[[Page 16284]]
AR lender to take a subordinate position on such collateral does not
harm HUD or the HUD lender's position with regard to the project or its
operations.
HUD Response: HUD recognizes the commenter's concern but has
determined that negative experiences in past practice require a
limitation on what obligations the project collateral may secure. To
address the commenter's concerns, HUD has provided bracketed
alternative language to this definition that may allow additional
obligations to be secured by project collateral with HUD consent.
Comment: Terms of AR Loan Advances and Applications of Payment Need
Revision. A commenter suggested that the terms and provisions of
section 3.4 relating to the terms of AR loan advances and how funds
received are applied should be revised to more accurately reflect
contemporary arrangements and HUD requirements and provide flexibility
for deal-specifics.
HUD Response: HUD agrees and the Intercreditor Agreement has been
revised to clarify the provisions, provide alternate language and make
this section revisable on a deal-specific basis.
Master Lease Addendum (HUD 92221-ORCF)
Comment: Specify the Healthcare Facility Ownership of FF&E, and
Transfer of Personal Payments. A commenter suggested that revisions are
necessary to the provisions regarding fixtures, furnishings, and
equipment in section 9 of the addendum to the master lease in order to
make this document consistent with the addendum to the operating lease.
HUD Response: HUD agrees and has revised this document accordingly.
Master Lease Subordination, Non-Disturbance and Attornment Agreement.
(HUD-92333-ORCF)
Comment: Restore Recitals and Execute Separate Subordination
Documents. A commenter stated that there is a conceptual problem with
this document as drafted. The commenter stated that accepted practice
to date, and a practice that the commenter suggested continue, is that
a separate Master Lease Subordination, Non-Disturbance and Attornment
Agreement (``SNDA'') be executed by the lender, the Master Tenant, the
applicable borrower who owns the facility which is securing the subject
HUD Loan, and by the Subtenant/Operator who operates that facility, on
a loan by loan basis. The draft document contemplates all Borrowers/
Landlords and all Subtenants/Operators execute the same SNDA. That
rarely, if ever, happens in practice because most HUD portfolio loans
close over an extended period of time, with borrowers added to a Master
Lease as the loan to each such borrower closes, with each borrower,
operator and the Master Tenant then signing a separate SNDA, as stated
above. The commenter stated that this proposed form will not work in
practice so the commenter strongly urged the restoration of the prior
recitals referencing ``Other HUD Borrowers'', ``Other Subleases,''
``Other Operators,'' and ``Other Mortgage Loans.''
HUD Response: HUD recognizes the commenter's concerns but has
determined that the document works as drafted. Since this addendum is
an addendum to the one master lease, there should only be one addendum
containing the required provisions, and additional parties can be added
as necessary.
Guide for Opinion of Borrower's Counsel (HUD-91725-ORCF)
Guide for Opinion of Operator's Counsel--Certification (HUD-92325-ORCF)
Guide for Opinion of Master Tenants Counsel Certification (HUD-92225-
ORCF)
Comment: Technical Revisions. A commenter suggested several
technical revisions to these documents.
HUD Response: HUD agrees in part and appropriate revisions are
reflected in the published redlined versions of the documents.
As noted previously, these and all other changes made in response
to comment are displayed in redline format on HUD's Web page, https://www.hud.gov/232forms.
V. Transition
Use of the final approved documents shall be implemented to
correspond with the applicability of the 2012 Final 232 Rule published
in the Federal Register on September 7, 2012 (FR 55120). As such, the
following documents (typically executed at the closing stage of a
transaction) shall be submitted for any transaction that receives a
firm commitment on or after April 9, 2013:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional ORCF Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-91112-ORCF.................... Request of Overpayment of Firm
Application Exam Fee.
HUD-92466-ORCF.................... Healthcare Regulatory Agreement--
Borrower.
HUD-92466A-ORCF................... Healthcare Regulatory Agreement--
Operator.
HUD-94000-ORCF.................... Security Instrument/Mortgage/Deed of
Trust.
HUD-94001-ORCF.................... Healthcare Facility Note.
HUD-91710-ORCF.................... Residual Receipts Note--Non Profit
Mortgagor.
HUD-92223-ORCF.................... Surplus Cash Note.
HUD-91110-ORCF.................... Subordination, Non-Disturbance and
Attornment Agreement of Operating
Lease (SNDA).
HUD-92420-ORCF.................... Subordination Agreement--Financing.
HUD-2205A-ORCF.................... Borrower's Certificate of Actual
Cost.
HUD-92323-ORCF.................... Operator Security Agreement.
HUD-91116-ORCF.................... Addendum to Operating Lease.
HUD-9839-ORCF..................... Management Certification--
Residential Care Facility.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Production Certifications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-91118-ORCF.................... Borrower's Certification--Completion
of Critical Repairs.
HUD-92434-ORCF.................... Lender Certification.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional Legal Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-91117-ORCF.................... Operator Estoppel Certificate.
HUD-91725-INST-ORCF............... Instructions to Guide for Opinion of
Borrower's and Operator's Counsel.
HUD-91725-CERT-ORCF............... Exhibit A to Opinion of Borrower's
Counsel--Certification.
HUD-91725-ORCF.................... Guide for Opinion of Borrower's
Counsel.
[[Page 16285]]
HUD-92325-ORCF.................... Guide for Opinion of Operator's
Counsel and Certification.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Escrow Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-91128-ORCF.................... Initial Operating Deficit Escrow
Calculation Template.
HUD-92414-ORCF.................... Latent Defects Escrow.
HUD-9443-ORCF..................... Minor Moveable Escrow.
HUD-92476-ORCF.................... Escrow Agreement Noncritical
Deferred Repairs.
HUD-92476B-ORCF................... Escrow Agreement for Operating
Deficits.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-91123-ORCF.................... Design Professional's Certification
of Liability Insurance.
HUD-93305-ORCF.................... Agreement and Certification.
HUD-92441-ORCF.................... Building Loan Agreement.
HUD-92441a-ORCF................... Building Loan Agreement
Supplemental.
HUD-92450-ORCF.................... Completion Assurance.
HUD-92442-ORCF.................... Construction Contract.
HUD-92554-ORCF.................... Supplementary Conditions of the
Contract for Construction.
HUD-92479-ORCF.................... Offsite Bond--Dual Obligee.
HUD-92452-ORCF.................... Performance Bond--Dual Obligee.
HUD-92452A-ORCF................... Payment Bond.
HUD-92455-ORCF.................... Request for Endorsement.
HUD-92412-ORCF.................... Working Capital Escrow.
HUD-9442-ORCF..................... Memo for Post-Commitment Early Start
of Construction Request.
HUD-92415-ORCF.................... Request for Permission to Commence
Construction Prior to Initial
Endorsement for Mortgage Insurance
(Post-Commitment Early Start of
Construction).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accounts Receivable Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-90020-ORCF.................... A/R Financing Certification.
HUD-92322-ORCF.................... Intercreditor Agreement (for AR
Financed Projects).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Lease Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-92211-ORCF.................... Master Lease Addendum.
HUD-92331-ORCF.................... Cross-Default Guaranty of
Subtenants.
HUD-92333-ORCF.................... Master Lease SNDA.
HUD-92335-ORCF.................... Guide for Opinion of Master Tenant's
Counsel.
HUD-92337-ORCF.................... Healthcare Regulatory Agreement--
Master Tenant.
HUD-92339-ORCF.................... Master Lease Estoppel Agreement.
HUD-92340-ORCF.................... Master Tenant Security Agreement.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The other final approved documents, as and when required, shall be
used beginning July 12, 2013. These documents include the following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lender Narratives
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-9001-ORCF..................... Lender Narrative 223a7--Main.
HUD-9001a-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative 223a7--Addenda--
PCNA.
HUD-9001b-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative 223a7.223d.232i--
Addendum--ALTA/ACSM Land Title
Survey.
HUD-9001c-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative 223a7--Addendum--
Environmental.
HUD-9001d-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative 223a7--Addendum--
Other Existing Eligible
Indebtedness.
HUD-9001e-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative 223a7.223d.232i--
Addendum--Principal of Borrower.
HUD-9001f-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative 223a7.223d.232i--
Addendum--Operator.
HUD-9001g-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative 223a7.223d.232i--
Addendum--Management Agent.
HUD-9001h-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative 223a7.223d.232i--
Addendum--Transfer of Physical
Assets.
HUD-9001i-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative 223a7.223d.232i--
Addendum--AR Financing.
HUD-9002-ORCF..................... Lender Narrative 223f.
HUD-9003-ORCF..................... Lender Narrative 241a.
HUD-9004-ORCF..................... Lender Narrative--New Construction--
Single Stage.
HUD-9005-ORCF..................... Lender Narrative--New Construction--
2 Stage Initial Submittal.
HUD-9005a-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative--New Construction--
2 Stage Final Submittal.
HUD-9006-ORCF..................... Lender Narrative--Substantial
Rehabilitation--Single Stage.
HUD-9007-ORCF..................... Lender Narrative--Substantial
Rehabilitation--2 Stage Initial
Submittal.
HUD-9007a-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative--Substantial
Rehabilitation--2 Stage Final
Submittal.
HUD-9008-ORCF..................... Lender Narrative--Blended Rate--
Single Stage.
HUD-90025-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative--Blended Rate--2
Stage--Initial Submittal.
HUD-90025a-ORCF................... Lender Narrative--Blended Rate--2
Stage--Final Submittal.
HUD-9009-ORCF..................... Lender Narrative 232(i)--Fire Safety
Equipment Installation, without
Existing HUD Insured Mortgage.
HUD-90010-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative 232(i)--Fire Safety
Equipment Installation, with
Existing HUD Insured Mortgage.
HUD-90011-ORCF.................... Lender Narrative 223(d)--Operating
Loss Loan.
[[Page 16286]]
HUD-9444-ORCF..................... Lender Narrative Cost Certification
Supplement.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Production Certifications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-90012-ORCF.................... Consolidated Certification--Lender.
HUD-90013-ORCF.................... Consolidated Certification--
Borrower.
HUD-90014-ORCF.................... Consolidated Certification--
Principal of the Borrower.
HUD-90015-ORCF.................... Consolidated Certification--
Operator.
HUD-90016-ORCF.................... Consolidated Certification--Parent
of Operator.
HUD-90017-ORCF.................... Consolidated Certification--
Management Agent.
HUD-90018-ORCF.................... Consolidated Certification--
Contractors.
HUD-90019-ORCF.................... Auditor Certification.
HUD-90022-ORCF.................... Certification for Electronic
Submittal.
HUD-91130-ORCF.................... Building Code Certification.
HUD-9445-ORCF..................... Certification of Outstanding
Obligations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional ORCF Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-91708-ORCF.................... Agreement for Payment of Real
Property Taxes.
HUD-92576A-ORCF................... Certificate of Need for Health
Facility.
HUD-90024-ORCF.................... Contact Sheet.
HUD-91126-ORCF.................... Financial Statement Certification.
HUD-941-ORCF...................... Lenders FHA Number Request Form.
HUD-92264a-ORCF................... Maximum Insurable Loan Calculation.
HUD-2-ORCF........................ Request for Waiver of Housing
Directive.
HUD-91119-ORCF.................... Schedule of Facilities Owned
Operated or Managed.
HUD-91111-ORCF.................... Survey Instructions and Borrower's
Certification.
HUD-92070-ORCF.................... Lease Addendum.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Escrow Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-92464-ORCF.................... Request Approval Advance of Escrow
Funds.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-91124-ORCF.................... Design Architect Certification.
HUD-91127-ORCF.................... Financial Statement Certification--
General Contractor.
HUD-92408-ORCF.................... HUD Amendment to B108.
HUD-91125-ORCF.................... Staffing Schedule.
HUD-95379-ORCF.................... HUD Representative's Trip Report.
HUD-91129-ORCF.................... Lender Certification for New
Construction Cost Certifications.
HUD-92456-ORCF.................... Escrow Agreement for Incomplete
Construction.
HUD-92023-ORCF.................... Request for Final Endorsement.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asset Management Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD-92266-ORCF.................... Application for Transfer of Physical
Assets (TPA).
HUD-93332-ORCF.................... Certification of Exigent Health &
Safety (EH&S) Issues.
HUD-93333-ORCF.................... Certification Physical Condition in
Compliance.
HUD-93486-ORCF.................... Computation of Surplus Cash.
HUD-9250-ORCF..................... Funds Authorizations.
HUD-9250A-ORCF.................... Borrower Certification and Request
Detail.
HUD-92228-ORCF.................... Model Form Bill of Sale and
Assignment.
HUD-92117-ORCF.................... Borrower's Certification--Completion
of Non-Critical Repairs.
HUD-92417-ORCF.................... Personal Financial and Credit
Statement.
HUD-93479-ORCF.................... Monthly Report for Establishing Net
Income.
HUD-93480-ORCF.................... Schedule of Disbursements.
HUD-93481-ORCF.................... Schedule of Accounts Payable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: March 8, 2013.
Carol J. Galante,
Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2013-05826 Filed 3-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P