Lawrence T. Foley, ASA, MRICS

1 4560 Aeries Way Drive ● Fort Myers, FL 33912 ● 239
- 284
- 4021 ● larry t foley@ 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 Complian ce 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 require ments 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a “technical review” is not included in Proposed Policy Statement 2 because that text has been deemed unnecessary and outdated.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 Poli cy 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 perform ed, 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 se rvice 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 wh ich 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 pr esence 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 t o 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

- r egulated 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 requiremen ts and the resulting impact on interstate commerce is certainly within the purview of a federal organization. We res pectfully request that Policy Statement 5 be retained and modified only as necessary to satisfy the express requirements of the Dodd

- Frank A ct. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Proposed Policy Statement.



### Lawrence T. Foley