Single Family Housing Direct and Guaranteed Loan Programs, 44504-44508 [2018-18683]
Download as PDF
44504
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 83, No. 170
Friday, August 31, 2018
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Rural Housing Service
7 CFR Parts 3550 and 3555
RIN 0575–AD13
Single Family Housing Direct and
Guaranteed Loan Programs
Rural Housing Service, USDA.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Through this action, the Rural
Housing Service (RHS or Agency) is
proposing to amend its regulations for
the direct and guaranteed single family
housing loan and grant programs.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule
must be received on or before October
30, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
to this rule by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments.
• Mail: Submit written comments via
the U.S. Postal Service to the Branch
Chief, Regulations and Paperwork
Management Branch, U.S. Department
of Agriculture, STOP 0742, 1400
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20250–0742.
All written comments will be
available for public inspection during
regular work hours at the address listed
above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shannon Chase, Finance and Loan
Analyst, Single Family Housing Direct
Loan Origination Branch, USDA Rural
Development, STOP 0783, 1400
Independence Ave. SW, Washington,
DC 20250–0783, Telephone: (515) 305–
0399. Email: shannon.chase@
wdc.usda.gov.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
The RHS
is proposing to amend its regulations for
the direct and guaranteed single family
housing loan and grant programs in 7
CFR parts 3550 and 3555 by:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Aug 30, 2018
Jkt 244001
(1) Revising the definition of very
low-, low-, and moderate-income to
allow for a two-tier income limit
structure (also known as income
banding) within the single family
housing direct loan and grant programs.
(2) Clarifying that net family assets are
not considered when calculating
repayment income, and that net family
assets exclude amounts in voluntary
retirement accounts, tax advantaged
college, health, or medical savings or
spending accounts, and other amounts
deemed by the Agency not to constitute
net family assets.
(3) Revising the methodology used to
determine the area loan limits to use a
percentage(s), as determined by the
Agency, of the applicable local HUD
section 203(b) limit.
(4) As a result of income banding,
converting borrowers currently
receiving payment assistance method 1
to payment assistance method 2 should
they receive a subsequent loan.
(5) Revising the definition of lowincome to allow for the two-tier income
limit structure (income banding) within
the single family housing guaranteed
loan program.
Statutory Authority
Section 510(k) of Title V the Housing
Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1480(k)), as
amended, authorizes the Secretary of
Agriculture to promulgate rules and
regulations as deemed necessary to
carry out the purpose of that title.
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has designated this rule as not
significant under Executive Order
12866.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform
This rule has been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. Except where specified, all
State and local laws and regulations that
are in direct conflict with this rule will
be preempted. Federal funds carry
Federal requirements. No person is
required to apply for funding under this
program, but if they do apply and are
selected for funding, they must comply
with the requirements applicable to the
Federal program funds. This rule is not
retroactive. It will not affect agreements
entered into prior to the effective date
of the rule. Before any judicial action
may be brought regarding the provisions
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
of this rule, the administrative appeal
provisions of 7 CFR part 11 must be
exhausted.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104–4, establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effect of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
and tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
the Agency generally must prepare a
written statement, including a costbenefit analysis, for proposed and final
rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
result in expenditures to State, local, or
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
to the private sector, of $100 million, or
more, in any one year. When such a
statement is needed for a rule, section
205 of the UMRA generally requires the
Agency to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives and adopt the least costly,
most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule.
This proposed rule contains no
Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for
State, local, and tribal governments or
the private sector. Therefore, this rule is
not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Environmental Impact Statement
This document has been reviewed in
accordance with 7 CFR part 1970,
subpart A, ‘‘Environmental Policies.’’ It
is the determination of the Agency that
this action does not constitute a major
Federal action significantly affecting the
quality of the human environment, and,
in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
Public Law 91–190, neither an
Environmental Assessment nor an
Environmental Impact Statement is
required.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The policies contained in this rule do
not have any substantial direct effect on
States, on the relationship between the
national government and States, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Nor does this rule
impose substantial direct compliance
costs on State and local governments.
Therefore, consultation with the States
is not required.
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Regulatory Flexibility Act
E-Government Act Compliance
In compliance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) the
undersigned has determined and
certified by signature of this document
that this rule, while affecting small
entities, will not have an adverse
economic impact on small entities. This
rule does not impose any significant
new requirements on program recipients
nor does it adversely impact proposed
real estate transactions involving
program recipients as the buyers.
RHS is committed to complying with
the E-Government Act, 44 U.S.C. 3601
et. seq., to promote the use of the
internet and other information
technologies to provide increased
opportunities for citizen access to
Government information and services,
and for other purposes.
Executive Order 12372,
Intergovernmental Review of Federal
Programs
This program/activity is not subject to
the provisions of Executive Order
12372, which require intergovernmental
consultation with State and local
officials. (See the Notice related to 7
CFR part 3015, subpart V, at 48 FR
29112, June 24, 1983; 49 FR 22675, May
31, 1984; 50 FR 14088, April 10, 1985.)
Executive Order 13175, Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This executive order imposes
requirements in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications or preempt tribal laws.
RHS has determined that the proposed
rule does not have a substantial direct
effect on one or more Indian tribe(s) or
on either the relationship or the
distribution of powers and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and the Indian tribes. Thus,
this proposed rule is not subject to the
requirements of Executive Order 13175.
Programs Affected
The following programs, which are
listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance, are affected by this proposed
rule: Number 10.410, Very Low to
Moderate Income Housing Loans
(specifically the section 502 direct and
guaranteed loans), and Number 10.417,
Very Low-Income Housing Repair Loans
and Grants (specifically the section 504
direct loans and grants).
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), the information collection
activities associated with this rule are
covered under OMB Number: 0575–
0172. This proposed rule contains no
new reporting or recordkeeping
requirements that would require
approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Aug 30, 2018
Jkt 244001
Non-Discrimination Policy
In accordance with Federal civil
rights law and U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) civil rights
regulations and policies, the USDA, its
Agencies, offices, and employees, and
institutions participating in or
administering USDA programs are
prohibited from discriminating based on
race, color, national origin, religion ,
sex, gender identity (including gender
expression), sexual orientation,
disability, age, marital status, family/
parental status, income derived from a
public assistance program, political
beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior
civil rights activity, in any program or
activity conducted or funded by USDA
(not all bases apply to all programs).
Remedies and complaint filing
deadlines vary by program or incident.
Persons with disabilities who require
alternative means of communication for
program information (e.g., Braille, large
print, audiotape, American Sign
Language, etc.) should contact the
responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET
Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and
TTY) or contact USDA through the
Federal Relay Service at (800) 877–8339.
Additionally, program information may
be made available in languages other
than English.
To file a program discrimination
complaint, complete the USDA Program
Discrimination Complaint Form, AD–
3027, found online at https://
www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_
cust.html and at any USDA office or
write a letter addressed to USDA and
provide in the letter all of the
information requested in the form. To
request a copy of the complaint form,
call (866) 632–9992. Submit your
completed form or letter to USDA by:
(1) Mail: U.S. Department of
Agriculture Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Civil Rights. 1400
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20250–9410;
(2) Fax: (202)690–7442; or
(3) Email: program.intake@usda.gov.
USDA is an equal opportunity
provider, employer, and lender.
I. Background
In order to improve the delivery of the
single family housing loan programs
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44505
and to promote consistency among the
programs when appropriate, RHS
proposes making the following revisions
to 7 CFR parts 3550 and 3555.
(1) Revising the definition of very
low-, low-, and moderate-income in
§ 3550.10 to allow for a two-tier income
limit structure (income banding) for the
single family housing direct loan and
grant programs.
The revisions will help minimize the
impact of varying minimum wages
among states and territories and the
observed disconnect between minimum
wages and the low median income in
many areas. Under current regulations,
the income of a household with two
people earning the minimum wage
would exceed the low-income eligibility
limit in 39 to 93 percent of the counties
in 16 states and territories. In other
words, under current regulations and
income limits, the income from a twoperson household earning minimum
wage may be considered too high to
qualify for a direct loan.
In accordance with Section 501(b)(4)
of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C.
1471(b)(4)), the terms ‘‘low income
families or persons’’ and ‘‘very lowincome families or persons’’ mean those
families and persons whose income do
not exceed the respective levels
established for low-income families and
very low-income families under the
United States Housing Act of 1937 (42
U.S.C. 1437 et seq.). The income levels
in the Housing Act of 1937 are generally
established by the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development
(HUD). RHS currently uses the HUD
income levels without income banding.
However, HUD programs authorized by
the Housing Act of 1937 focus on
renting as opposed to home purchases,
which contributes to the
disqualification of households with
minimum wage earners as described
above. The Agency has been operating
a pilot in 23 states to test the alternate
methodology of a two-tier income limit
structure to address this issue.
For the pilot, the Agency used the
authority in 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2)(D),
which provides for HUD and USDA to
consult on income ceilings for rural
areas, taking into account the types of
programs that will use the income
ceilings as well as subsidy
characteristics. Based on this authority,
the Agency used a two-tier income limit
structure for the single family housing
programs which bands together 1–4
person households using the 4-person
income level set by HUD, and 5–8
person households using the 8-person
income level established by HUD. The
pilot has successfully served more
borrowers, providing meaningful
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
44506
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2018 / Proposed Rules
homeownership opportunities to those
who would otherwise be denied. The
Agency is now proposing to use income
banding to determine all limits for very
low-income, low-income, moderateincome, 38 year term, and adjusted
median income.
Such banding has successfully been
used to establish the moderate income
limits in the guaranteed single family
housing loan program for years (the
term ‘‘moderate income’’ is not defined
in Section 501(b)(4) of the Housing Act
of 1949 and therefore is not restricted in
the same way as ‘‘very low-’’ and ‘‘lowincome’’).
The Agency has consulted with HUD,
and both agencies agree that the two-tier
income limit approach is suitable for the
USDA single family housing loan and
grant programs. The impacted income
definitions in § 3550.10 will be revised
to simply state that the respective limit
is ‘‘an adjusted income limit developed
in consultation with HUD’’. The two-tier
income limits will be published
annually via a Procedure Notice and
posted to the Agency website at https://
www.rd.usda.gov/files/RD-DirectLimit
Map.pdf.
The Agency also proposes to revise
the definition of moderate income so
that it does not exceed the moderate
income limit established for the
guaranteed single family housing loan
program. The Agency will publish a
specific limit in the program handbook.
The revisions to the income
definitions will ultimately allow the
Agency and HUD to account for the
differences between renting (which is
the focus of HUD and 42 U.S.C. 1437 et
seq.) and owning a home. This proposed
action will improve program availability
to the intended recipients.
(2) Revising § 3550.54(d) to remove
the requirement that net family assets be
included in the calculation of
repayment income.
Currently, net family assets are
considered for determining annual
income, down payment purposes, and
repayment income. The Agency
proposes to exclude net family assets
from repayment income calculations
because repayment income focuses on
the income of those who sign the
promissory note, whereas net family
assets considers the finances of other
family members. Net family assets will
still be considered for annual income
and down payment purposes.
The Agency also proposes to revise
the regulation so that the list of net
family assets considered for annual
income and down payment purposes
would exclude amounts in voluntary
retirement accounts such as individual
retirement accounts (IRAs), 401(k)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Aug 30, 2018
Jkt 244001
plans, Keogh accounts, and the cash
value of life insurance policies.
In addition, the Agency proposes to
exclude the value of tax advantaged
college savings plans, the value of tax
advantaged health or medical savings or
spending accounts, and other amounts
deemed by the Agency, from net family
assets considered in the determination
of annual income and down payments.
Excluding these types of assets when
considering annual income or down
payment requirements will help
safeguard the assets for their intended
purposes and promote a healthy
financial support system for the
household when it does incur education
and health care costs, or enters
retirement.
The Agency also proposes removing
from net family assets the value, in
excess of the consideration received, for
any business or household assets
disposed of for less than the fair market
value during the 2 years preceding the
income determination. This proposed
change recognizes that it is not
productive or meaningful to consider
assets which have been disposed of in
the past.
Lastly, the Agency proposes two
minor changes primarily for consistency
between the direct and guaranteed
single family housing loan regulations.
The Agency proposes to include in net
family assets any equity in capital
investments for consistency with the
guaranteed single family housing loan
regulations, as well as obtaining a full
understanding of an applicant’s
financial condition before making a
decision on a loan. In the exclusions
from net family assets, the Agency
proposes to change the language from
‘‘American Indian trust land’’ to
‘‘American Indian restricted land’’. The
terms ‘‘trust land’’ and ‘‘restricted’’ are
often used interchangeably, and the
proposed revision is for consistency
between the direct and guaranteed
program regulations, and will not result
in any substantive changes.
(3) Revising the methodology used to
determine the area loan limits in
§ 3550.63(a) to use a percentage(s), as
determined by the Agency, of the
applicable local HUD section 203(b)
limit.
The revisions to the area loan limit
methodology will streamline the
determination of area loan limits and
improve the reliability of the data set
used to establish the area loan limits.
The current process to annually
establish the area loan limits uses a data
set based on overly restrictive
nationalized parameters and requires a
significant amount of staff time on all
levels (field, state, and national).
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Currently, § 3550.63(a) allows for two
methods that a State Director may use
to establish area loan limits. The first
option is based on the cost to construct
a modest home plus the market value of
an improved lot based on recent sales
data. The second option allows the State
Director to use State Housing Authority
(SHA) limits as long as the limit is
within 10 percent of the cost data plus
the market value of the improved lot.
This second option is rarely used
because the SHA limits are usually not
within the 10 percent limit.
For the first option, the most widely
used option, the Agency contracts with
a third party that provides building cost
data for real estate valuations to obtain
construction costs, but those
construction costs are based on
parameters for homes that do not reflect
the varied modest homes available to
program borrowers. In addition,
obtaining the market value is a timeconsuming process relying on collecting
and updating recent home sales data,
which is particularly difficult given
Agency staff appraiser shortages over
the past few years.
The Agency has been operating a pilot
to test the alternate methodology of
basing the area loan limits on a
percentage of the FHA Forward OneFamily mortgage limits (the HUD 203(b)
limit). Under the pilot, 80 percent of the
HUD 203(b) limit was used to establish
the area loan limits in selected pilot
states. The 80 percent was established
based on a side-by-side, county-bycounty comparison of the Agency’s
existing area loan limits to various
percentages of the HUD 203(b) limits. It
was determined that 80 percent of the
HUD 203(b) limits was adequate to
cover the loan amounts in the majority
of states (vs. lower percentages of 60–70
percent).
While the pilot states generally
experienced increases in their area loan
limits, the increases were not
significant, in part because an
applicant’s qualification amount
continues to be limited to repayment
ability, property eligibility criteria (for
example, properties financed through
the program are currently subject to
2,000 square feet), and other factors.
Average loan amounts in the pilot states
increased 13.4 percent from Fiscal Year
2015 to 2017, while average loan
amounts in the non-pilot states have
increased 5.4 percent during the same
period.
The Agency believes the higher
percent increase in the pilot states is
acceptable for several reasons. For
example, the alternate methodology
makes new construction under the
program more feasible, and new
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2018 / Proposed Rules
construction can improve a rural
community’s housing stock and
economy. In addition, this proposed
action will save the Agency more than
$70,000 each year (which is the cost to
obtain the construction cost data set
from a nationally recognized residential
cost provider). A significant amount of
staff time will also be saved.
The Agency will determine the
percentage(s) based on housing market
conditions and trends, and publish the
percentage(s) in the program handbook.
The resulting area loan limits will be
posted to the Agency website at https://
www.rd.usda.gov/files/RD-SFHArea
LoanLimitMap.pdf. The proposed
change allows the Agency to adjust the
percentage(s) as necessary in order to be
responsive to housing market conditions
and trends.
(4) Revising § 3550.68(b)(2) to convert
a borrower currently receiving payment
assistance method 1 to payment
assistance method 2 should that
borrower receive a subsequent loan.
The proposed change is related to the
income banding proposal, as payment
assistance method 2 will more closely
align the subsidy with what is actually
needed for affordability. The proposed
change avoids potentially oversubsidizing borrowers using payment
assistance method 1 under the income
banding system, and reduces the
potential for negative impacts to the
program’s subsidy rate.
(5) Revising the definition of lowincome in § 3555.10 for the single
family housing guaranteed loan program
to allow for the two-tier income limit
structure (income banding) discussed
above. The two-tier income limits will
be published annually via a Procedure
Notice and posted to the Agency
website at https://www.rd.usda.gov/
files/RD-GRHLimitMap.pdf.
The single family housing guaranteed
loan program provides guarantees to
lenders who make loans to low- and
moderate-income borrowers in rural
areas who are without sufficient
resources or credit to obtain a loan
without the guarantee. As mentioned,
the guaranteed loan program already
uses the two-tier income limit structure
for moderate income limits. The
proposed change would allow the twotier income limit structure to be used for
determining the very low- and lowincome limits in the guaranteed loan
program.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Parts 3550 and
3555
Administrative practice and
procedure, Environmental impact
statements, Fair housing, Grant
programs—housing and community
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Aug 30, 2018
Jkt 244001
development, Housing, Loan
programs—housing and community
development, Low and moderate
income housing, Manufactured homes,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Rural areas.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, 7 CFR parts 3550 and 3555
are proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 3550—DIRECT SINGLE FAMILY
HOUSING LOANS AND GRANTS
1. The authority citation for part 3550
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 42 U.S.C. 1480(k).
Subpart A—General
2. Section 3550.10 is amended by
revising the definitions of ‘‘low
income’’, ‘‘moderate income’’, and ‘‘very
low income’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 3550.10
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Low income. An adjusted income
limit developed in consultation with
HUD under 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2)(D).
*
*
*
*
*
Moderate income. An adjusted
income that does not exceed the
moderate income limit for the
guaranteed single family housing loan
program authorized by Section 502(h) of
the Housing Act of 1949, as amended.
*
*
*
*
*
Very low income. An adjusted income
limit developed in consultation with
HUD under 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2)(D).
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart B—Section 502 Origination
3. In § 3550.54:
a. Revise the first sentence of
paragraph (d) introductory text;
■ b. Revise paragraphs (d)(1)
introductory text and (d)(1)(i);
■ c. Revise paragraphs (d)(1)(iv) through
(vi);
■ d. Remove paragraph (d)(1)(vii);
■ e. Revise paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and (v);
and
■ f. Add paragraphs (d)(2)(vi) through
(x).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
■
§ 3550.54
assets.
Calculation of income and
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Net family assets. Income from net
family assets must be included in the
calculation of annual income. * * *
(1) Net family assets include, but are
not limited to:
(i) Equity in real property or other
capital investments, other than the
dwelling or site;
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44507
(iv) Stocks, bonds, and other forms of
capital investments that are accessible
to the applicant without retiring or
terminating employment;
(v) Lump sum receipts such as lottery
winnings, capital gains, inheritances;
and
(vi) Personal property held as an
investment.
(2) * * *
(i) Interest in American Indian
restricted land;
*
*
*
*
*
(v) Amounts in voluntary retirement
plans such as individual retirement
accounts (IRAs), 401(k) plans, and
Keogh accounts (except at the time
interest assistance is initially granted);
(vi) The value of an irrevocable trust
fund or any other trust over which no
member of the household has control;
(vii) Cash value of life insurance
policies;
(viii) The value of tax advantaged
college savings plans (529 plan,
Coverdell Education Savings Account,
etc.);
(ix) The value of tax advantaged
health or medical savings or spending
accounts; and
(x) Other amounts deemed by the
Agency not to constitute net family
assets.
■ 4. In § 3550.63, paragraph (a)(1) is
revised to read as follows in its entirety:
§ 3550.63
Maximum loan amount.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(1) The area loan limit is the
maximum value of the property RHS
will finance in a given locality. This
limit is based on a percentage(s) of the
applicable local HUD section 203(b)
limit. The percentage(s) will be
determined by the Agency and
published in the program handbook.
The area loan limits will be reviewed at
least annually and posted to the Agency
website.
(i) [Removed]
(ii) [Removed]
(iii) [Removed]
(iv) [Removed]
(v) [Removed]
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. In § 3550.68, paragraph (b)(2) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 3550.68
Payment subsidies.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) If a borrower receiving payment
assistance using payment assistance
method 1 received a subsequent loan,
payment assistance method 2 will be
used to calculate the subsidy for the
initial loan and subsequent loan.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
44508
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2018 / Proposed Rules
PART 3555—GUARANTEED RURAL
HOUSING PROGRAM
6. The authority citation for part 3555
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 42 U.S.C. 1480(k).
Subpart A—General
2. Section 3555.10 is amended to
revising the definition of ‘‘low-income’’
to read as follows:
■
§ 3555.10
Definitions and abbreviations.
*
*
*
*
*
Low-income. An adjusted income
limit developed in consultation with
HUD under 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2)(D).
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: August 1, 2018.
Joel C. Baxley,
Administrator, Rural Housing Service.
[FR Doc. 2018–18683 Filed 8–30–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–XV–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
Examining the AD Docket
[Docket No. FAA–2018–0763; Product
Identifier 2018–NM–052–AD]
You may examine the AD docket on
the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2018–
0763; or in person at the Docket
Management Facility between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this NPRM, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for
the Docket Office (phone: 800–647–
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kelly McGuckin, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Section, FAA,
Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th
Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; phone
and fax: 206–231–3546; email:
Kelly.McGuckin@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 787–8 and
787–9 airplanes. This proposed AD was
prompted by a determination that
certain areas in the tire/wheel threat
zones could be susceptible to damage,
which could result in loss of braking on
one main landing gear (MLG) truck, loss
of nose wheel steering, and loss of
directional control on the ground when
below rudder effectiveness speed. This
proposed AD would require installing
hydraulic tubing, a pressure-operated
check valve, and new flight control
software. We are proposing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these
products.
SUMMARY:
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this NPRM, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster
Blvd., MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740–5600; telephone 562–797–1717;
internet https://www.myboeingfleet.
com. You may view this referenced
service information at the FAA,
Transport Standards Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195.
It is also available on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA–2018–
0763.
We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by October 15, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Aug 30, 2018
Jkt 244001
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposal. Send your comments to
an address listed under the ADDRESSES
section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–
2018–0763; Product Identifier 2018–
NM–052–AD’’ at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this NPRM. We will consider
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
all comments received by the closing
date and may amend this NPRM
because of those comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
Discussion
Boeing determined that certain areas
in the tire/wheel threat zones could be
susceptible to damage due to a thrown
tire tread or tire burst. This could result
in a loss of braking on one MLG truck,
loss of nose wheel steering, and loss of
directional control on the ground when
below rudder effectiveness speed. The
Model 787 hydraulic system is
configured with a reserve steering
system intended to maintain the nose
wheel steering function in the event that
a thrown tire tread or tire burst leads to
a brake system failure such that
differential braking cannot be used for
directional control. Boeing has
determined that damage from a MLG
thrown tire tread or tire burst event
could also result in the loss of the
reserve steering system, resulting in loss
of directional control on the ground and
consequent runway excursion.
Related Service Information Under 1
CFR Part 51
We reviewed Boeing Alert Service
Bulletins B787–81205–SB290032–00
and B787–81205–SB290033–00, both
Issue 001, both dated November 17,
2017. This service information describes
procedures for installing hydraulic
tubing and installing a pressureoperated check valve. These documents
are distinct since they apply to different
airplane models.
We also reviewed Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin B787–81205–
SB270039–00, Issue 002, dated March 8,
2018. This service information describes
procedures for installing new flight
control software.
This service information is reasonably
available because the interested parties
have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means
identified in the ADDRESSES section.
FAA’s Determination
We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all the relevant information
and determined the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or
develop in other products of the same
type design.
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 170 (Friday, August 31, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44504-44508]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18683]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2018 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 44504]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Rural Housing Service
7 CFR Parts 3550 and 3555
RIN 0575-AD13
Single Family Housing Direct and Guaranteed Loan Programs
AGENCY: Rural Housing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Through this action, the Rural Housing Service (RHS or Agency)
is proposing to amend its regulations for the direct and guaranteed
single family housing loan and grant programs.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule must be received on or before
October 30, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments to this rule by any of the following
methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Submit written comments via the U.S. Postal Service
to the Branch Chief, Regulations and Paperwork Management Branch, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, STOP 0742, 1400 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC 20250-0742.
All written comments will be available for public inspection during
regular work hours at the address listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shannon Chase, Finance and Loan
Analyst, Single Family Housing Direct Loan Origination Branch, USDA
Rural Development, STOP 0783, 1400 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC
20250-0783, Telephone: (515) 305-0399. Email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The RHS is proposing to amend its
regulations for the direct and guaranteed single family housing loan
and grant programs in 7 CFR parts 3550 and 3555 by:
(1) Revising the definition of very low-, low-, and moderate-income
to allow for a two-tier income limit structure (also known as income
banding) within the single family housing direct loan and grant
programs.
(2) Clarifying that net family assets are not considered when
calculating repayment income, and that net family assets exclude
amounts in voluntary retirement accounts, tax advantaged college,
health, or medical savings or spending accounts, and other amounts
deemed by the Agency not to constitute net family assets.
(3) Revising the methodology used to determine the area loan limits
to use a percentage(s), as determined by the Agency, of the applicable
local HUD section 203(b) limit.
(4) As a result of income banding, converting borrowers currently
receiving payment assistance method 1 to payment assistance method 2
should they receive a subsequent loan.
(5) Revising the definition of low-income to allow for the two-tier
income limit structure (income banding) within the single family
housing guaranteed loan program.
Statutory Authority
Section 510(k) of Title V the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C.
1480(k)), as amended, authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to
promulgate rules and regulations as deemed necessary to carry out the
purpose of that title.
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has designated this rule
as not significant under Executive Order 12866.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. Except where specified, all State and local laws and
regulations that are in direct conflict with this rule will be
preempted. Federal funds carry Federal requirements. No person is
required to apply for funding under this program, but if they do apply
and are selected for funding, they must comply with the requirements
applicable to the Federal program funds. This rule is not retroactive.
It will not affect agreements entered into prior to the effective date
of the rule. Before any judicial action may be brought regarding the
provisions of this rule, the administrative appeal provisions of 7 CFR
part 11 must be exhausted.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effect of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the
Agency generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal
mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100
million, or more, in any one year. When such a statement is needed for
a rule, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the Agency to
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule.
This proposed rule contains no Federal mandates (under the
regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, and
tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this rule is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Environmental Impact Statement
This document has been reviewed in accordance with 7 CFR part 1970,
subpart A, ``Environmental Policies.'' It is the determination of the
Agency that this action does not constitute a major Federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, and, in
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Public
Law 91-190, neither an Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental
Impact Statement is required.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The policies contained in this rule do not have any substantial
direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national
government and States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor does this
rule impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local
governments. Therefore, consultation with the States is not required.
[[Page 44505]]
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) the undersigned has determined and certified by signature of this
document that this rule, while affecting small entities, will not have
an adverse economic impact on small entities. This rule does not impose
any significant new requirements on program recipients nor does it
adversely impact proposed real estate transactions involving program
recipients as the buyers.
Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs
This program/activity is not subject to the provisions of Executive
Order 12372, which require intergovernmental consultation with State
and local officials. (See the Notice related to 7 CFR part 3015,
subpart V, at 48 FR 29112, June 24, 1983; 49 FR 22675, May 31, 1984; 50
FR 14088, April 10, 1985.)
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This executive order imposes requirements in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal implications or preempt tribal
laws. RHS has determined that the proposed rule does not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribe(s) or on either
the relationship or the distribution of powers and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes. Thus, this
proposed rule is not subject to the requirements of Executive Order
13175.
Programs Affected
The following programs, which are listed in the Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance, are affected by this proposed rule: Number 10.410,
Very Low to Moderate Income Housing Loans (specifically the section 502
direct and guaranteed loans), and Number 10.417, Very Low-Income
Housing Repair Loans and Grants (specifically the section 504 direct
loans and grants).
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), the information collection activities associated with
this rule are covered under OMB Number: 0575-0172. This proposed rule
contains no new reporting or recordkeeping requirements that would
require approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
E-Government Act Compliance
RHS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, 44 U.S.C.
3601 et. seq., to promote the use of the internet and other information
technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to
Government information and services, and for other purposes.
Non-Discrimination Policy
In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its
Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or
administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on
race, color, national origin, religion , sex, gender identity
(including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age,
marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public
assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for
prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or
funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and
complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of
communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print,
audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible
Agency or USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or
contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.
Additionally, program information may be made available in languages
other than English.
To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA
Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at https://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or
write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the
information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint
form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA
by:
(1) Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Civil Rights. 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
20250-9410;
(2) Fax: (202)690-7442; or
(3) Email: [email protected].
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.
I. Background
In order to improve the delivery of the single family housing loan
programs and to promote consistency among the programs when
appropriate, RHS proposes making the following revisions to 7 CFR parts
3550 and 3555.
(1) Revising the definition of very low-, low-, and moderate-income
in Sec. 3550.10 to allow for a two-tier income limit structure (income
banding) for the single family housing direct loan and grant programs.
The revisions will help minimize the impact of varying minimum
wages among states and territories and the observed disconnect between
minimum wages and the low median income in many areas. Under current
regulations, the income of a household with two people earning the
minimum wage would exceed the low-income eligibility limit in 39 to 93
percent of the counties in 16 states and territories. In other words,
under current regulations and income limits, the income from a two-
person household earning minimum wage may be considered too high to
qualify for a direct loan.
In accordance with Section 501(b)(4) of the Housing Act of 1949 (42
U.S.C. 1471(b)(4)), the terms ``low income families or persons'' and
``very low-income families or persons'' mean those families and persons
whose income do not exceed the respective levels established for low-
income families and very low-income families under the United States
Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.). The income levels in the
Housing Act of 1937 are generally established by the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD). RHS currently uses the HUD income
levels without income banding. However, HUD programs authorized by the
Housing Act of 1937 focus on renting as opposed to home purchases,
which contributes to the disqualification of households with minimum
wage earners as described above. The Agency has been operating a pilot
in 23 states to test the alternate methodology of a two-tier income
limit structure to address this issue.
For the pilot, the Agency used the authority in 42 U.S.C.
1437a(b)(2)(D), which provides for HUD and USDA to consult on income
ceilings for rural areas, taking into account the types of programs
that will use the income ceilings as well as subsidy characteristics.
Based on this authority, the Agency used a two-tier income limit
structure for the single family housing programs which bands together
1-4 person households using the 4-person income level set by HUD, and
5-8 person households using the 8-person income level established by
HUD. The pilot has successfully served more borrowers, providing
meaningful
[[Page 44506]]
homeownership opportunities to those who would otherwise be denied. The
Agency is now proposing to use income banding to determine all limits
for very low-income, low-income, moderate-income, 38 year term, and
adjusted median income.
Such banding has successfully been used to establish the moderate
income limits in the guaranteed single family housing loan program for
years (the term ``moderate income'' is not defined in Section 501(b)(4)
of the Housing Act of 1949 and therefore is not restricted in the same
way as ``very low-'' and ``low-income'').
The Agency has consulted with HUD, and both agencies agree that the
two-tier income limit approach is suitable for the USDA single family
housing loan and grant programs. The impacted income definitions in
Sec. 3550.10 will be revised to simply state that the respective limit
is ``an adjusted income limit developed in consultation with HUD''. The
two-tier income limits will be published annually via a Procedure
Notice and posted to the Agency website at https://www.rd.usda.gov/files/RD-DirectLimitMap.pdf.
The Agency also proposes to revise the definition of moderate
income so that it does not exceed the moderate income limit established
for the guaranteed single family housing loan program. The Agency will
publish a specific limit in the program handbook.
The revisions to the income definitions will ultimately allow the
Agency and HUD to account for the differences between renting (which is
the focus of HUD and 42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) and owning a home. This
proposed action will improve program availability to the intended
recipients.
(2) Revising Sec. 3550.54(d) to remove the requirement that net
family assets be included in the calculation of repayment income.
Currently, net family assets are considered for determining annual
income, down payment purposes, and repayment income. The Agency
proposes to exclude net family assets from repayment income
calculations because repayment income focuses on the income of those
who sign the promissory note, whereas net family assets considers the
finances of other family members. Net family assets will still be
considered for annual income and down payment purposes.
The Agency also proposes to revise the regulation so that the list
of net family assets considered for annual income and down payment
purposes would exclude amounts in voluntary retirement accounts such as
individual retirement accounts (IRAs), 401(k) plans, Keogh accounts,
and the cash value of life insurance policies.
In addition, the Agency proposes to exclude the value of tax
advantaged college savings plans, the value of tax advantaged health or
medical savings or spending accounts, and other amounts deemed by the
Agency, from net family assets considered in the determination of
annual income and down payments.
Excluding these types of assets when considering annual income or
down payment requirements will help safeguard the assets for their
intended purposes and promote a healthy financial support system for
the household when it does incur education and health care costs, or
enters retirement.
The Agency also proposes removing from net family assets the value,
in excess of the consideration received, for any business or household
assets disposed of for less than the fair market value during the 2
years preceding the income determination. This proposed change
recognizes that it is not productive or meaningful to consider assets
which have been disposed of in the past.
Lastly, the Agency proposes two minor changes primarily for
consistency between the direct and guaranteed single family housing
loan regulations. The Agency proposes to include in net family assets
any equity in capital investments for consistency with the guaranteed
single family housing loan regulations, as well as obtaining a full
understanding of an applicant's financial condition before making a
decision on a loan. In the exclusions from net family assets, the
Agency proposes to change the language from ``American Indian trust
land'' to ``American Indian restricted land''. The terms ``trust land''
and ``restricted'' are often used interchangeably, and the proposed
revision is for consistency between the direct and guaranteed program
regulations, and will not result in any substantive changes.
(3) Revising the methodology used to determine the area loan limits
in Sec. 3550.63(a) to use a percentage(s), as determined by the
Agency, of the applicable local HUD section 203(b) limit.
The revisions to the area loan limit methodology will streamline
the determination of area loan limits and improve the reliability of
the data set used to establish the area loan limits. The current
process to annually establish the area loan limits uses a data set
based on overly restrictive nationalized parameters and requires a
significant amount of staff time on all levels (field, state, and
national). Currently, Sec. 3550.63(a) allows for two methods that a
State Director may use to establish area loan limits. The first option
is based on the cost to construct a modest home plus the market value
of an improved lot based on recent sales data. The second option allows
the State Director to use State Housing Authority (SHA) limits as long
as the limit is within 10 percent of the cost data plus the market
value of the improved lot. This second option is rarely used because
the SHA limits are usually not within the 10 percent limit.
For the first option, the most widely used option, the Agency
contracts with a third party that provides building cost data for real
estate valuations to obtain construction costs, but those construction
costs are based on parameters for homes that do not reflect the varied
modest homes available to program borrowers. In addition, obtaining the
market value is a time-consuming process relying on collecting and
updating recent home sales data, which is particularly difficult given
Agency staff appraiser shortages over the past few years.
The Agency has been operating a pilot to test the alternate
methodology of basing the area loan limits on a percentage of the FHA
Forward One-Family mortgage limits (the HUD 203(b) limit). Under the
pilot, 80 percent of the HUD 203(b) limit was used to establish the
area loan limits in selected pilot states. The 80 percent was
established based on a side-by-side, county-by-county comparison of the
Agency's existing area loan limits to various percentages of the HUD
203(b) limits. It was determined that 80 percent of the HUD 203(b)
limits was adequate to cover the loan amounts in the majority of states
(vs. lower percentages of 60-70 percent).
While the pilot states generally experienced increases in their
area loan limits, the increases were not significant, in part because
an applicant's qualification amount continues to be limited to
repayment ability, property eligibility criteria (for example,
properties financed through the program are currently subject to 2,000
square feet), and other factors. Average loan amounts in the pilot
states increased 13.4 percent from Fiscal Year 2015 to 2017, while
average loan amounts in the non-pilot states have increased 5.4 percent
during the same period.
The Agency believes the higher percent increase in the pilot states
is acceptable for several reasons. For example, the alternate
methodology makes new construction under the program more feasible, and
new
[[Page 44507]]
construction can improve a rural community's housing stock and economy.
In addition, this proposed action will save the Agency more than
$70,000 each year (which is the cost to obtain the construction cost
data set from a nationally recognized residential cost provider). A
significant amount of staff time will also be saved.
The Agency will determine the percentage(s) based on housing market
conditions and trends, and publish the percentage(s) in the program
handbook. The resulting area loan limits will be posted to the Agency
website at https://www.rd.usda.gov/files/RD-SFHAreaLoanLimitMap.pdf.
The proposed change allows the Agency to adjust the percentage(s) as
necessary in order to be responsive to housing market conditions and
trends.
(4) Revising Sec. 3550.68(b)(2) to convert a borrower currently
receiving payment assistance method 1 to payment assistance method 2
should that borrower receive a subsequent loan.
The proposed change is related to the income banding proposal, as
payment assistance method 2 will more closely align the subsidy with
what is actually needed for affordability. The proposed change avoids
potentially over-subsidizing borrowers using payment assistance method
1 under the income banding system, and reduces the potential for
negative impacts to the program's subsidy rate.
(5) Revising the definition of low-income in Sec. 3555.10 for the
single family housing guaranteed loan program to allow for the two-tier
income limit structure (income banding) discussed above. The two-tier
income limits will be published annually via a Procedure Notice and
posted to the Agency website at https://www.rd.usda.gov/files/RD-GRHLimitMap.pdf.
The single family housing guaranteed loan program provides
guarantees to lenders who make loans to low- and moderate-income
borrowers in rural areas who are without sufficient resources or credit
to obtain a loan without the guarantee. As mentioned, the guaranteed
loan program already uses the two-tier income limit structure for
moderate income limits. The proposed change would allow the two-tier
income limit structure to be used for determining the very low- and
low-income limits in the guaranteed loan program.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Parts 3550 and 3555
Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental impact
statements, Fair housing, Grant programs--housing and community
development, Housing, Loan programs--housing and community development,
Low and moderate income housing, Manufactured homes, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Rural areas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, 7 CFR parts 3550 and 3555
are proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 3550--DIRECT SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING LOANS AND GRANTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 3550 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 42 U.S.C. 1480(k).
Subpart A--General
0
2. Section 3550.10 is amended by revising the definitions of ``low
income'', ``moderate income'', and ``very low income'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 3550.10 Definitions.
* * * * *
Low income. An adjusted income limit developed in consultation with
HUD under 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2)(D).
* * * * *
Moderate income. An adjusted income that does not exceed the
moderate income limit for the guaranteed single family housing loan
program authorized by Section 502(h) of the Housing Act of 1949, as
amended.
* * * * *
Very low income. An adjusted income limit developed in consultation
with HUD under 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2)(D).
* * * * *
Subpart B--Section 502 Origination
0
3. In Sec. 3550.54:
0
a. Revise the first sentence of paragraph (d) introductory text;
0
b. Revise paragraphs (d)(1) introductory text and (d)(1)(i);
0
c. Revise paragraphs (d)(1)(iv) through (vi);
0
d. Remove paragraph (d)(1)(vii);
0
e. Revise paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and (v); and
0
f. Add paragraphs (d)(2)(vi) through (x).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 3550.54 Calculation of income and assets.
* * * * *
(d) Net family assets. Income from net family assets must be
included in the calculation of annual income. * * *
(1) Net family assets include, but are not limited to:
(i) Equity in real property or other capital investments, other
than the dwelling or site;
* * * * *
(iv) Stocks, bonds, and other forms of capital investments that are
accessible to the applicant without retiring or terminating employment;
(v) Lump sum receipts such as lottery winnings, capital gains,
inheritances; and
(vi) Personal property held as an investment.
(2) * * *
(i) Interest in American Indian restricted land;
* * * * *
(v) Amounts in voluntary retirement plans such as individual
retirement accounts (IRAs), 401(k) plans, and Keogh accounts (except at
the time interest assistance is initially granted);
(vi) The value of an irrevocable trust fund or any other trust over
which no member of the household has control;
(vii) Cash value of life insurance policies;
(viii) The value of tax advantaged college savings plans (529 plan,
Coverdell Education Savings Account, etc.);
(ix) The value of tax advantaged health or medical savings or
spending accounts; and
(x) Other amounts deemed by the Agency not to constitute net family
assets.
0
4. In Sec. 3550.63, paragraph (a)(1) is revised to read as follows in
its entirety:
Sec. 3550.63 Maximum loan amount.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) The area loan limit is the maximum value of the property RHS
will finance in a given locality. This limit is based on a
percentage(s) of the applicable local HUD section 203(b) limit. The
percentage(s) will be determined by the Agency and published in the
program handbook. The area loan limits will be reviewed at least
annually and posted to the Agency website.
(i) [Removed]
(ii) [Removed]
(iii) [Removed]
(iv) [Removed]
(v) [Removed]
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 3550.68, paragraph (b)(2) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 3550.68 Payment subsidies.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) If a borrower receiving payment assistance using payment
assistance method 1 received a subsequent loan, payment assistance
method 2 will be used to calculate the subsidy for the initial loan and
subsequent loan.
* * * * *
[[Page 44508]]
PART 3555--GUARANTEED RURAL HOUSING PROGRAM
0
6. The authority citation for part 3555 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 42 U.S.C. 1480(k).
Subpart A--General
0
2. Section 3555.10 is amended to revising the definition of ``low-
income'' to read as follows:
Sec. 3555.10 Definitions and abbreviations.
* * * * *
Low-income. An adjusted income limit developed in consultation with
HUD under 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2)(D).
* * * * *
Dated: August 1, 2018.
Joel C. Baxley,
Administrator, Rural Housing Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-18683 Filed 8-30-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-XV-P