[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 18, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23559-23564]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08005]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY

12 CFR Part 1282

RIN 2590-AB22


Enterprise Duty To Serve Underserved Markets--Colonia Census 
Tract Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Housing Finance Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) is adopting as 
final, without change, a proposed rule that amends its Enterprise Duty 
to Serve Underserved Markets regulation to add a definition of 
``colonia census tract,'' to serve as a census tract-based proxy for a 
``colonia.'' The final rule also amends the definition of ``high-needs 
rural region'' in the regulation by substituting ``colonia census 
tract'' for ``colonia.'' In addition, the final rule revises the 
definition of ``rural area'' in the regulation to include all colonia 
census tracts regardless of their location. These changes will make 
certain activities by the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie 
Mae) and the

[[Page 23560]]

Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) (collectively, the 
Enterprises) in all colonia census tracts eligible for Duty to Serve 
credit. The intent of the changes is to facilitate the Enterprises' 
ability to operationalize their Duty to Serve activities in colonia 
census tracts and thereby help increase liquidity in these underserved 
communities.

DATES: The final rule is effective July 1, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ted Wartell, Associate Director, 
Office of Housing and Community Investment, 202-649-3157, 
[email protected]; Marcea Barringer, Supervisory Policy Analyst, 
Office of Housing and Community Investment, 202-649-3275, 
[email protected]; or Dinah Knight, Assistant General Counsel, 
Office of General Counsel, (202) 748-7801, [email protected], 
Federal Housing Finance Agency, 400 Seventh Street SW, Washington, DC 
20219. These are not toll-free numbers. For TTY/TRS users with hearing 
and speech disabilities, dial 711 and ask to be connected to any of the 
contact numbers above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Statutory and Regulatory Background

    The Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act 
of 1992 (Safety and Soundness Act) provides generally that the 
Enterprises ``have an affirmative obligation to facilitate the 
financing of affordable housing for low- and moderate-income 
families.'' \1\ Section 1129 of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act 
of 2008 (HERA) amended section 1335 of the Safety and Soundness Act to 
establish a duty for the Enterprises to serve three specified 
underserved markets in order to increase the liquidity of mortgage 
investments and improve the distribution of investment capital 
available for mortgage financing for certain categories of borrowers in 
those markets.\2\ Specifically, the Enterprises are required to provide 
leadership in developing loan products and flexible underwriting 
guidelines to facilitate a secondary market for mortgages on housing 
for very low-, low-, and moderate-income families for the manufactured 
housing, affordable housing preservation, and rural housing markets.\3\ 
In addition, section 1335(d)(1) of the Safety and Soundness Act 
requires FHFA to establish, by regulation, a method for evaluating and 
rating the Enterprises' compliance with the Duty to Serve underserved 
markets.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 12 U.S.C. 4501(7).
    \2\ See 12 U.S.C. 4565.
    \3\ See 12 U.S.C. 4565(a). The terms ``very low-income,'' ``low-
income,'' and ``moderate-income'' are defined in 12 U.S.C. 4502.
    \4\ See 12 U.S.C. 4565(d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FHFA's current Duty to Serve regulation implements these statutory 
requirements.\5\ Specifically, the regulation requires each Enterprise 
to adopt a three-year Underserved Markets Plan (Plan) containing the 
specific objectives and activities the Enterprise will undertake during 
that time period in each of the three underserved markets.\6\ The 
regulation sets forth specific ``Regulatory Activities'' under each of 
the three underserved markets that are eligible for Duty to Serve 
credit and that an Enterprise may choose to include in its Plan. One 
such Regulatory Activity in the rural housing market is Enterprise 
activity in ``high-needs rural regions,'' which are defined to include 
colonias.\7\ The regulation defines a ``colonia'' as an identifiable 
community that meets the definition of a colonia under a federal, 
State, tribal, or local program.\8\ The regulation defines a ``rural 
area'' as (i) a census tract outside of a metropolitan statistical area 
(MSA) as designated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB); or 
(ii) a census tract in an MSA but outside of the MSA's Urbanized Areas 
as designated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Rural-
Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) Code #1 and outside of tracts with a 
housing density of more than 64 housing units per square mile in USDA's 
RUCA Code #2.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 12 CFR part 1282, subpart C.
    \6\ 12 CFR 1282.32.
    \7\ 12 CFR 1282.1, 1282.35(c)(1).
    \8\ 12 CFR 1282.1.
    \9\ 12 CFR 1282.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Implementation Challenges

    FHFA has identified two main challenges that have hindered the 
Enterprises' Duty to Serve activities in colonias. The first challenge 
is an operational one that has prevented the Enterprises from easily 
identifying and verifying Duty to Serve-eligible loan purchases and 
outreach activities in colonias. The identification of a colonia under 
the existing Duty to Service regulation's definition relies on the 
identification of the community as a colonia using federal, State, 
tribal, or local definitions. These definitions are based on varied 
criteria and boundaries. Some rely on descriptive terms that may be 
meaningful only at the local level, such as neighborhood names, and are 
generally not tied to any standard geographic identifiers used by 
lenders such as census tracts. There is no specific, uniform definition 
of ``colonia'' that can be easily operationalized and included in a 
public database that the Enterprises and lenders can check to determine 
if a particular loan is located in an eligible colonia. As a result, 
the Enterprises and lenders must engage in a time-consuming and labor-
intensive process that is susceptible to error to determine whether a 
particular loan falls within the specified boundary of a colonia that 
meets the definition.
    In light of these challenges, Fannie Mae engaged a nonprofit 
organization with research capacities, the Housing Assistance Council 
(HAC), to conduct research and analysis in an effort to develop a 
nationwide, usable and programmatic methodology that would enable 
accurate targeting and tracking of loans in these communities. As part 
of this research, HAC mapped federal, State, tribal, and local 
definitions of colonia to census tracts.
    The second challenge is related to the ability of the Duty to Serve 
program to effectively target eligible households in colonias due to 
the under-inclusion of colonias in the Duty to Serve regulation's 
existing ``rural area'' definition. Under the Duty to Serve regulation, 
an Enterprise is eligible to receive Duty to Serve credit for 
activities supporting colonias if the activities (e.g., loan purchases) 
are located in a ``colonia,'' as defined in the regulation, and the 
colonia is located in a ``rural area,'' as defined in the regulation. 
FHFA has learned that its definition of ``rural area'' has 
unintentionally excluded a large share of colonias from eligibility for 
Duty to Serve credit.
    To address these challenges, FHFA published a Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (NPRM or proposed rule) in the Federal Register on October 
5, 2022 at 87 FR 60331, that proposed to amend the Duty to Serve 
regulation to: (1) add a definition of ``colonia census tract,'' 
meaning a colonia located in a census tract, to serve as a census 
tract-based proxy for a ``colonia''; (2) amend the definition of 
``high-needs rural region'' by substituting ``colonia census tract'' 
for ``colonia''; and (3) revise the definition of ``rural area'' to 
include all colonia census tracts regardless of their location within 
or outside an MSA. FHFA also specifically requested comments in the 
proposed rule preamble on the following three questions about the 
identification and verification of Duty to Serve-eligible activities in 
colonias:
     Question 1--What are the advantages and disadvantages, if 
any, to using colonia census tracts instead of colonias, for purposes 
of identifying and

[[Page 23561]]

verifying Duty to Serve-eligible activities?
     Question 2--Are there other ways to identify the 
geographic areas in which the Enterprises should receive Duty to Serve 
credit for eligible activities addressing colonias? If so, describe the 
alternative approach(es) and any advantages and disadvantages over the 
proposed census tract-based methodology.
     Question 3--What are the advantages and disadvantages, if 
any, to revising the Duty to Serve ``rural area'' definition to 
incorporate all census tracts that contain a colonia regardless of 
their location?
    The public comment period on the proposed rule ended on December 5, 
2022.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 87 FR 60331 (Oct. 5, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Public Comments Received on the Proposed Rule

    FHFA received 10 comments in response to the proposed rule. 
Comments were submitted by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, four nonprofit 
organizations, two policy advocacy organizations, and two individuals. 
FHFA has reviewed and considered all of the comments. The comments 
received and FHFA's responses are summarized by topic in the sections 
below.

A. Definition Added for Use of Colonia Census Tracts

    A majority of the commenters supported the proposal to add a 
definition of ``colonia census tract'' to mean a census tract 
containing a colonia, which will serve as a proxy for the colonia. Both 
Enterprises, the four nonprofit organizations, and the two policy 
advocacy organizations stated that the proposal would improve and 
enhance the ability of the Enterprises to meet the credit needs of 
these high-poverty areas. Several of the commenters stated that the 
current regulation's definition of ``colonia'' does not fully reflect 
or encompass the evolving geographies and characteristics of colonias. 
Commenters stated that the proposed use of ``colonia census tracts'' as 
a proxy for colonias would result in a clear, functional, usable, and 
flexible methodology for identifying and verifying Duty to Serve-
eligibility criteria, which would enhance stakeholder certainty with 
respect to targeting loan purchases and outreach to colonia census 
tracts.
    Commenters stated that the proposed amendments would structurally 
incentivize the Enterprises to do more for hundreds of communities 
along the United States-Mexico border and greater southwest, and 
thereby help to increase liquidity in these underserved communities. 
Many of the commenters also suggested that the proposed use of colonia 
census tracts could ``create a beneficial ripple effect'' if replicated 
by other federal agencies that have colonia-focused programs. For 
example, three of the nonprofit organizations projected that widespread 
implementation of the proposal ``would result in the real possibility 
of economically integrating colonia communities to their surrounding 
economies, supercharging efforts to address decades of disparities.'' 
One of the policy advocacy organizations also predicted that adoption 
of the proposal by other federal agencies ``could further comprehensive 
community development efforts to the benefit of all in those 
communities.''
    In response to FHFA's Question 1 about the advantages and 
disadvantages of using colonia census tracts instead of colonias for 
purposes of identifying and verifying Duty to Serve-eligible 
activities, three nonprofits and the two policy advocacy organizations 
highlighted the advantages of, as well as their own experiences with, 
using colonia census tracts. The three nonprofit organizations stressed 
that the main advantage in using colonia census tracts is that it 
achieves stability in the methodology while maintaining flexibility to 
adapt to evolving geographies. Some commenters also stated that federal 
efforts to define colonias geographically have historically failed due 
to the evolving nature and characteristics of colonias, especially 
since the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 
1994. The commenters noted that shifting geographic footprints, a lack 
of understanding as to what constitutes a colonia, and deference to 
contradictory parameters at the state level have all contributed to the 
failures to define colonias. As a result, the commenters stated that 
the Enterprises have lacked clear guidance on what counts as Duty to 
Serve-eligible activities in colonias, rendering any potential efforts 
to hone best practices in serving these unique communities unworkable. 
These commenters also emphasized the ease of obtaining, as well as the 
accuracy of using, colonia census tracts as opposed to the existing 
Duty to Serve definition of colonia. The commenters also provided 
examples of how they have successfully used colonia census tracts to 
target and direct resources to colonias, even when those colonias are 
surrounded by mixed-income non-colonia communities.
    In response to FHFA's Question 2 on whether there are other ways to 
identify the geographic areas in which the Enterprises should receive 
Duty to Serve credit for eligible activities addressing colonias, one 
policy advocacy organization, HAC, noted that it had conducted 
extensive research and analysis in an effort to develop a nation-wide, 
usable and programmatic methodology that would enable accurate 
targeting and tracking of loans in colonias. The commenter stated that 
it found that other approaches have serious disadvantages when compared 
to the use of a census tract-based methodology. As a result, the 
commenter stated that its research, which it described as carefully 
considered, rigorous, and thoroughly reviewed by experts, concluded 
that the use of a census tract-based methodology would best enable 
mortgage lenders and other financial service providers to target and 
serve colonia communities more efficiently and effectively.
    An individual commenter stated that while the proposed amendments 
would require that the Enterprises serve colonia census tracts, they 
would not hold the Enterprises accountable for serving colonias 
themselves, which the commenter further stated could undermine FHFA's 
rationale for proposing the amendments. Another individual commenter 
stated that the matters covered by the proposed rule reside with the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development, not FHFA and the 
Enterprises, and that the goal for FHFA should be conserving and 
preserving to put the Enterprises on stronger footing, not mandating 
more risk or serving the interests of specific administrations or FHFA 
Directors.
    FHFA has considered the comments received on the use of colonia 
census tracts and continues to be persuaded that adding a definition of 
``colonia census tract'' to serve as a census tract-based proxy for a 
``colonia'' will enhance the ability of the Enterprises to meet the 
credit needs of these high-poverty areas. A census tract-based approach 
will also align FHFA's treatment of colonias under the Duty to Serve 
regulation with other census tract-based standards for Enterprise 
reporting to FHFA. For example, FHFA collects data at the census tract 
level to assess compliance with other Duty to Serve requirements and 
the Enterprise Housing Goals. Specifically, census tracts serve as the 
basis for identifying other geographically based underserved areas, 
including low-income areas and area median income to determine

[[Page 23562]]

affordability and compliance with Duty to Serve and Enterprise Housing 
Goals objectives.
    Regarding the commenter's concern about holding the Enterprises 
accountable for serving colonias themselves, FHFA will encourage the 
Enterprises to work with local entities that specifically serve 
colonias to increase access to credit in these areas. Regarding the 
comment on FHFA's and the Enterprises' role in this area, FHFA clearly 
identified and described in the NPRM its statutory authority for 
regulating the Enterprises' Duty to Serve responsibilities and 
activities. These Duty to Serve responsibilities of each Enterprise 
include developing and executing a Plan describing the specific 
activities and objectives it will undertake to fulfill its Duty to 
Serve in each underserved market over a three-year period. In addition, 
FHFA issues Evaluation Guidance that describes procedures for preparing 
the Plans and the standards FHFA has established for evaluating and 
rating Enterprise compliance with the Plans, as well as the impact on 
each of the underserved markets.\11\ Together, these measures establish 
and communicate a framework and expectations for holding the 
Enterprises accountable for fulfilling their Duty to Serve 
responsibilities. FHFA will monitor and evaluate the impact of 
implementation of this final rule on Enterprise activities in colonia 
census tracts, and may modify its Evaluation Guidance to address any 
Enterprise underperformance in this underserved market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The current Duty to Serve Evaluation Guidance is available 
at: https://www.fhfa.gov/PolicyProgramsResearch/Programs/Documents/Evaluation-Guidance_2022-5.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Revising the Definitions of ``High-Needs Rural Region'' and ``Rural 
Area'' To Include All Colonia Census Tracts

    A majority of the commenters also supported the proposal to revise 
the Duty to Serve regulation's definition of ``high-needs rural 
region'' to include colonia census tracts, and to revise the Duty to 
Serve regulation's definition of ``rural area'' to include all colonia 
census tracts, regardless of their location within or outside an MSA, 
due to the inherently rural nature and characteristics of all colonia 
census tracts. In response to FHFA's Question 3 about any advantages 
and disadvantages associated with revising the Duty to Serve ``rural 
area'' definition to incorporate all census tracts that contain a 
colonia regardless of their location, the nonprofit organizations and 
the policy advocacy organizations pointed out that a colonia's 
proximity to an MSA does not guarantee that it has access to public 
utilities and transportation infrastructure. The commenters stated that 
colonias embody a rural existence because they are often cut off from 
municipal services and denied integration into the surrounding economy 
as local governments have chosen not to incorporate them. For these 
reasons, the commenters described the proposal to include all colonia 
census tracts, regardless of their location, in the definition of 
``rural area'' as a ``commonsense measure'' capable of further 
incentivizing the Enterprises to meet their Duty to Serve obligations. 
The commenters also highlighted as another benefit associated with 
revising the ``rural area'' definition that it would streamline the 
process of identifying Duty to Serve-eligible loans.
    An individual commenter, while acknowledging that colonias are 
vastly underserved regions with similar characteristics to rural areas 
regardless of their location, stated that treating all colonia census 
tracts as rural, regardless of whether they are located within or 
outside an MSA, would differ from the regulation's use of an MSA-based 
standard for the other high-needs rural regions, which could lead to 
confusion and difficulty in implementing the proposed amendments.
    A policy advocacy organization recommended that the regulation 
provide greater, or weighted, Duty to Serve credit for Enterprise 
activities in colonia census tracts located in rural areas as the 
latter term is defined in the current regulation, on the basis that the 
needs in such rural colonia census tracts are even greater than those 
in urban colonia census tracts. As an alternative, the commenter 
suggested that FHFA base the weighting differential on poverty rates 
rather than location, with greater Duty to Serve credit given to 
Enterprise activities in the highest poverty tracts.
    After considering the comments, FHFA remains persuaded that the 
proposed amendments to revise the definitions of ``high-needs rural 
region'' and ``rural area'' to include all colonia census tracts, 
regardless of their location, is appropriate. While FHFA appreciates 
the recommendation that greater weight be given to Enterprise 
activities in colonia census tracts located in rural areas as currently 
defined in the regulation, the final rule does not adopt this 
suggestion. The NPRM described a number of challenges the Enterprises 
have encountered over the years in targeting colonias, including 
operational challenges that have prevented them from easily identifying 
and verifying Duty to Serve-eligible loan purchases and outreach 
activities in colonias. Another challenge the Enterprises have faced is 
their inability to effectively target eligible households in colonias 
due to the under-inclusion of colonias in the current Duty to Serve 
regulation's ``rural area'' definition. Placing greater weight on 
Enterprise activities in certain colonia census tracts would introduce 
a layer of complexity that may detract from the stated objective of the 
proposed amendments--to facilitate the Enterprises' ability to 
operationalize their Duty to Serve activities and thereby help increase 
liquidity in these underserved communities.
    Regarding the comment about the proposal not relying on an MSA-
based standard for colonia census tracts as is used for the other high-
needs rural regions, FHFA notes that the rationale for departing from 
this standard was addressed in the NPRM. The NPRM stated that an 
analysis of 2020 census data found that only 260 of the 577 census 
tracts that contain colonias meet the current Duty to Serve ``rural 
area'' definition.\12\ The remaining 317 colonia census tracts, which 
are located within an MSA, do not qualify for Duty to Serve credit 
under the current ``rural area'' definition.\13\ The NPRM also noted 
that all colonia census tracts have high poverty rates and low housing 
density, which contribute to limited access to credit for the 
households in those communities.\14\ Based on this analysis, FHFA 
determined that Enterprise activities in all colonia census tracts--
regardless of whether they are located within or outside an MSA--should 
qualify for Duty to Serve credit. As a result, FHFA is confident that 
implementation of the amendments will reduce the challenges and 
difficulties the Enterprises have encountered implementing the current 
definitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 87 FR 60335.
    \13\ Id.
    \14\ See 87 FR 60336.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, FHFA believes that it is appropriate to amend the 
definitions of ``high-needs rural region'' and ``rural area'' in Sec.  
1282.1(b) to include all colonia census tracts regardless of their 
location. Accordingly, the final rule amends the definition of ``high-
needs rural region'' by substituting ``colonia census tract'' for 
``colonia,'' and revises the second component of the ``rural area'' 
definition (par. (ii)) to include colonia census tracts that would not 
otherwise satisfy the ``rural area'' definition.

[[Page 23563]]

C. Updating Colonia Census Tract Data

    The NPRM discusses how FHFA currently publishes and regularly 
updates on its website a Rural Areas Data file that specifies the 
census tracts in the other high-needs rural regions where Enterprise 
activities are eligible for Duty to Serve credit.\15\ FHFA stated in 
the NPRM that it has not been able to include colonia census tracts in 
the Rural Areas Data file due to the absence of a comprehensive list of 
census tracts containing colonias. The Rural Areas Data file will be 
expanded to include colonia census tracts now that the federal, State, 
tribal, and local definitions of colonia have been mapped to census 
tracts. The availability of this information in the Rural Areas Data 
file will make it easier for the Enterprises and lenders to target 
outreach and loan purchases in these locations, and to assess the 
impact of efforts to improve housing conditions in these areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See 87 FR 60335.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the NPRM, FHFA stated that it would periodically update the 
colonia census tracts included in FHFA's Rural Areas Data file, for use 
by the Enterprises and other interested parties.\16\ A nonprofit 
organization and a policy advocacy organization supported FHFA's intent 
to periodically update the colonia census tracts included in the file. 
The commenters appeared to interpret the word ``periodically'' to mean 
once every 10 years, when census tract boundaries are updated in the 
decennial Census and stated that that cadence may not be sufficient. 
The commenters noted that more frequent updates by FHFA may be 
necessary as federal, State, tribal, or local governments may update 
their definitions of ``colonias'' more frequently than every 10 years. 
Both commenters recommended that FHFA provide updates if a significant 
development or change occurs during the 10-year period after census 
tract boundaries are updated, such as if new data is developed by a 
public entity, a major study is issued, or a new investment initiative 
is introduced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See 87 FR 60337.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FHFA agrees that more frequent updates to the colonia census tracts 
included in the Rural Areas Data file may be necessary during the 10-
year period after census tract boundaries are updated. The NPRM 
described FHFA's plan to periodically update the colonia census tracts 
in the file, by which FHFA meant on an ``as needed'' basis.\17\ FHFA 
also agrees with the types of events the commenters identified as 
reasons for periodically updating the colonia census tracts in the 
file. FHFA plans to monitor for significant developments or changes 
that would necessitate the need to update the colonia census tract data 
and will include such updates in the file.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Effective Date of the Final Rule

    Both Enterprises provided recommendations on when the final rule 
should take effect. Fannie Mae expressed concern that if the final rule 
were to become effective some time after January 1, 2023, the 
Enterprises would have administrative challenges with applying two 
different definitions of ``high-needs rural region'' and ``rural area'' 
in 2023, as the current regulation's definitions would continue to 
apply until the final rule's new definitions became effective. 
Accordingly, Fannie Mae recommended that the final rule be effective on 
January 1, 2023. Although Freddie Mac did not recommend a specific 
effective date for the final rule, it requested a three-month 
implementation period to update its reporting platform.
    FHFA has decided to make the final rule's effective date July 1, 
2023, the beginning of the third calendar quarter of 2023. FHFA 
acknowledges that the Enterprises may encounter administrative 
challenges associated with applying two different definitions of 
``high-needs rural region'' and ``rural area'' in 2023. However, as 
Freddie Mac commented, FHFA recognizes that the Enterprises will need 
time to prepare for their implementation of the final rule. An 
effective date of July 1, 2023 will give the Enterprises time after 
publication of the final rule to notify lenders and other stakeholders 
of the rule's amendments, adjust their marketing strategies and other 
outreach activities as necessary, and update their reporting platforms 
to be able to accurately report on loan purchases and other activities 
in colonia census tracts. In addition, because the Enterprises report 
to FHFA on their Duty to Serve performance on a quarterly basis, 
establishing the effective date as the beginning of the third calendar 
quarter will avoid their having to report based on two different 
definitions within the same calendar quarter.

IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires that 
a regulation that has a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, small businesses, or small organizations must 
include an initial regulatory flexibility analysis describing the 
regulation's impact on small entities. FHFA need not undertake such an 
analysis if FHFA has certified that the regulation will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
(5 U.S.C. 605(b)). FHFA has considered the impact of the final rule 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act and FHFA certifies that the 
regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because the regulation only applies to Fannie 
Mae and Freddie Mac, which are not small entities for purposes of the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

V. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) requires 
that regulations involving the collection of information receive 
clearance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The final 
rule contains no such collection of information requiring OMB approval 
under the PRA. Therefore, FHFA has not submitted the final rule to OMB 
for review under the PRA.

VI. Congressional Review Act

    In accordance with the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et 
seq.), FHFA has determined that this final rule is a major rule and has 
verified this determination with the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs of OMB.

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1282

    Mortgages; Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, under the authority of 12 
U.S.C. 4501, 4502, 4511, 4513, 4526, and 4561-4566, FHFA amends part 
1282 of subchapter E of 12 CFR chapter XII, as follows:

PART 1282--ENTERPRISE HOUSING GOALS AND MISSION

0
1. The authority citation for part 1282 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  12 U.S.C. 4501, 4502, 4511, 4513, 4526, 4561-4566.


0
2. Amend Sec.  1282.1(b) by:
0
a. Adding in alphabetical order the definition of ``Colonia census 
tract'';
0
b. In paragraph (iii) of the definition ``High-needs rural region'' 
adding the words ``census tract'' after the word ``colonia''; and
0
c. Revising the definition of ``Rural area''.
    The addition and revision read as follows:


Sec.  1282. 1  Definitions.

* * * * *

[[Page 23564]]

    Colonia census tract, for purposes of subpart C of this part, means 
a census tract that contains a colonia.
* * * * *
    Rural area, for purposes of subpart C of this part, means:
    (i) A census tract outside of a metropolitan statistical area as 
designated by the Office of Management and Budget; or
    (ii) A census tract in a metropolitan statistical area as 
designated by the Office of Management and Budget that is:
    (A) Outside of the metropolitan statistical area's Urbanized Areas 
as designated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Rural-
Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) Code #1, and outside of tracts with a 
housing density of over 64 housing units per square mile for USDA's 
RUCA Code #2; or
    (B) A colonia census tract that does not satisfy paragraphs (i) or 
(ii)(A) of this definition.
* * * * *

Sandra L. Thompson,
Director, Federal Housing Finance Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-08005 Filed 4-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8070-01-P