Lawrence T. Foley, ASA, MRICS

14560 Aeries Way Drive ● Fort Myers, FL 33912 ● 239-284-4021 ● larrytfoley@aol.com

November 29, 2012

VIA E-MAIL: webmaster@asc.gov

Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council 

Appraisal Subcommittee 

Attention: Lori Schuster 

1401 H Street N.W. Suite 760 

Washington, D.C. 20005

Subject: Appraisal Subcommittee; Proposed Policy Statements; Docket No. AS12-16 (the “NPR”)

Dear Ms. Schuster:

Proposed Policy Statement 2 set forth in the NPR is designed to replace current Policy Statement 5 

(Temporary Practice) and is intended to address the second area of review in the ASC Compliance Review Process 

pertaining to temporary practice for compliance with Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and 

Enforcement Act of 1989, as amended.

According to the NPR, the language in current Policy Statement 5 concerning the requirements of an 

appraiser to register for temporary practice in a State to perform a “technical review” is not included in Proposed 

Policy Statement 2 because that text has been deemed unnecessary and outdated. While the term “technical review” 

is not defined in the Policy Statement, it is a term that is well understood and generally accepted and, importantly, 

relied upon in the appraisal industry. I respectfully request that the Appraisal Subcommittee reconsider including the 

following language of current Policy Statement 5 in Proposed Policy Statement 2:

“For federally related transactions the review appraiser need not register for temporary 

practice or otherwise be subjected to the regulatory jurisdiction of the State agency in 

which the appraisal was performed, so long as the review appraiser does not perform the 

technical review in the State within which the property is located.”

The removal of the foregoing language from Policy Statement 5 could be interpreted as requiring reviewers 

employed by financial service institutions to acquire state licenses or temporary practice permits in order to review 

appraisal reports of properties located in states where they are not currently licensed.

Policy Statement 5 as presently effective provides the foundation upon which federally regulated institutions 

permit their reviewers who are licensed or certified to perform appraisal reviews in states where they are not 

certified providing they don’t enter the subject property state. If this statement is removed, and in the presence of a 

state law requiring local certification, there is no authority to rely upon for this standard and necessary industry 

practice. Financial service institutions have consistently considered Statement 5 as federal guidance and have relied 

upon it to support the way that they conduct business.

The removal would significantly increase complexity and costs for federally regulated institutions and 

significantly hamper interstate commerce. This would result in an unintended negative impact to federally-regulated 

financial services institutions and the consumers they serve.

While the Appraisal Subcommittee may not feel it has the jurisdiction to address individual state licensing, 

the national effect of the existing patchwork of individual state requirements and the resulting impact on interstate 

commerce is certainly within the purview of a federal organization. We respectfully request that Policy Statement 5 

be retained and modified only as necessary to satisfy the express requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Proposed Policy Statement.

Lawrence T. Foley