71726 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 24, 2010 / Notices 

Does the size or creditworthiness of 

the loan originator influence the level of 

scrutiny of individual loans? 

(f) How has warehouse lending 

evolved since HUD issued its 

regulations on table funding and 

secondary market transactions in 1994? 

(2) What particular characteristics 

distinguish warehouse lending from 

retail lending? What is the role of 

warehouse lending within the primary 

mortgage market versus the secondary 

market? 

(3) What distinguishes the funding of 

a mortgage loan from a sale of the 

mortgage loan in the secondary market? 

For example, what characteristics 

indicate a bona fide transfer of the loan 

obligation, such that the transaction 

would be a secondary market 

transaction that is not covered by HUD’s 

RESPA regulations? 

What are the basic mechanics for the 

sale of a loan by a warehouse lender 

into the secondary market? Specifically, 

what are the mechanics for identifying, 

locating, and transferring mortgages to 

secondary market participants, and 

what are the respective roles of each of 

the parties involved in these activities? 

Do warehouse lenders sell directly to 

the secondary market? Do warehouse 

lenders utilize loan originators in the 

sale of loans into the secondary market? 

If so, how? 

Do warehouse lenders participate in 

purchasing loans in the secondary 

market? If so, do warehouse lenders 

purchase loans from loan originators 

with whom they have a warehouse 

lending relationship? Do the criteria for 

purchase from a loan originator within 

the warehouse lending relationship 

differ from the criteria for purchase from 

a loan originator without this 

relationship? 

Is there a need to clarify the 

secondary market exemption as set forth 

in 24 CFR 3500.5(b)(7)? If so, how 

should the exemption be clarified? 

(4) What role does a warehouse lender 

play in a table funded transaction? 

Does a warehouse lender fund loans 

at settlement contemporaneously with 

assignment of the loans to the 

warehouse lender by the loan originator, 

or contemporaneously with receiving 

some other evidence of a debt obligation 

from the loan originator? 

(5) What, if any, characteristics 

distinguish a table funded transaction 

completed by a mortgage broker from a 

loan made by a mortgage banker who 

has an advance commitment to sell the 

loan after settlement? 

(6) Does a warehouse lender fund 

mortgage loans within the meaning of 

‘‘settlement service’’ as that term is 

defined in section 2 of RESPA and 24 

CFR 3500.2? 

(7) What factors determine who is 

identified as the payee on the mortgage 

loan note? 

(8) Have concerns about protection 

under bankruptcy laws influenced 

changes in how warehouse lenders 

operate in relation to loan originators? If 

so, what concerns, and what changes 

have resulted? 

(9) What do warehouse lenders regard 

as being their obligations for providing 

the disclosures required under RESPA? 

For example, in a mortgage loan 

transaction that involves a warehouse 

lender, what is the warehouse lender’s 

obligation with regard to providing a 

good faith estimate disclosure to the 

borrower? 

(10) Do consumers or others have 

concerns with regard to mortgage 

industry participants’ current 

interpretation of HUD’s secondary 

market exemption, including the impact 

that such interpretations may have on 

consumers regarding coverage of RESPA 

disclosures and Section 8 protections 

against kickbacks and referral fees? 

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 2601–2617; 42 U.S.C. 

3535(d). 

Dated: November 16, 2010. 

Helen R. Kanovsky, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29663 Filed 11–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Central Utah Project Completion Act 

AGENCY: Department of the Interior, 

Office of the Assistant Secretary—Water 

and Science. 

ACTION: Notice of availability of the 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

(FONSI) and associated Final 

Environmental Assessment (EA)— 

Realignment of a Portion of the Utah 

Lake Drainage Basin Water Delivery 

System. 

SUMMARY: On November 15, 2010, the 

Department of the Interior (Interior), 

signed a FONSI associated with the 

Final EA—Realignment of a Portion of 

the Utah Lake Drainage Basin Water 

Delivery System. Interior has 

determined that the proposed action as 

detailed in the FONSI will not have a 

significant impact on the quality of the 

human environment, and that an 

environmental impact statement is not 

required. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the EA and FONSI 

are available for inspection at: 

• Central Utah Water Conservancy 

District, 355 West University Parkway, 

Orem, Utah 84058–7303. 

• Department of the Interior, Central 

Utah Project Completion Act Office, 302 

East 1860 South, Provo, Utah 84606. 

The documents are also available at 

http://www.cuwcd.com and http:// 

www.cupcao.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Contact Mr. 

Lee Baxter, Central Utah Project 

Completion Act Office, 302 East 1860 

South, Provo, Utah 84606; (801) 379– 

1174; e-mail at lbaxter@uc.usbr.gov. 

Date: November 17, 2010. 

Reed R. Murray, 

Program Director, Central Utah Project 

Completion Act, Department of the Interior. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29582 Filed 11–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–RK–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R1–ES–2010–N227; 10120–1113– 

0000–C4] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 5-Year Status Reviews of 

58 Species in Washington, Oregon, 

California, and Hawaii 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of initiation of reviews; 

request for information. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, are initiating 5-year 

reviews for 58 species in Washington, 

Oregon, California, and Hawaii under 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). We request any new 

information on these species that may 

have a bearing on their classification as 

endangered or threatened. Based on the 

results of our 5-year reviews we will 

determine whether these species are 

properly classified under the Act. 

DATES: To ensure consideration in our 

reviews, we are requesting submission 

of new information no later than 

January 24, 2011. However, we will 

continue to accept new information 

about any listed species at any time. 

ADDRESSES: For the 52 species in Hawaii 

(see Table 1 below), submit information 

to: Field Supervisor, Attention: 5-Year 

Review, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, 

300 Ala Moana Blvd., Room 3–122, Box 

50088, Honolulu, HI 96850. Information 

can also be submitted by e-mail to: 

pifwo-5yr-review@fws.gov. 

For the Oregon silverspot butterfly, 

northern spotted owl, and 

Stephanomeria malheurensis, submit 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES