Notice and Request for Comments, 38482-38484 [E9-18525]

Download as PDF 38482 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 147 / Monday, August 3, 2009 / Notices severe hypoglycemia, significant complications, or inability to manage diabetes; also, any involvement in an accident or any other adverse event in a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or not they are related to an episode of hypoglycemia; (3) that each individual provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s or optometrist’s report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (4) that each individual provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver’s qualification file, or keep a copy in his/her driver’s qualification file if he/she is selfemployed. The driver must also have a copy of the certification when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official. Discussion of Comments FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding. sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES Conclusion Based upon its evaluation of the twenty-one exemption applications, FMCSA exempts: Eugene L. Bradley, John F. Carruthers, Keith A. Craven, Jose E. Cruz, Daniel L. Dixon, Michael A. Garufi, Joseph P. Jurewicz II, Dana N. Larsen, Jason G. Leavitt, Chad M. Morris, Thomas M. Petee, Jim A. Phelps, Larry R. Price, James F. Rabideau, Jr., Stanley N. Reneau, Richard D. Ritenour, John E. Spano, Delton N. Stewart, Mark S. Sundberg, Timothy G. Walls, and Kelly R. Winslow from the ITDM standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), subject to the conditions listed under ‘‘Conditions and Requirements’’ above. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 each exemption will be valid for two years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315. If the exemption is still effective at the end of the 2-year period, the person may apply to FMCSA for a renewal under procedures in effect at that time. Issued on: July 24, 2009. Larry W. Minor, Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development. [FR Doc. E9–18450 Filed 7–31–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:05 Jul 31, 2009 Jkt 217001 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Notice and Request for Comments AGENCY: Community Development Financial Institutions Fund. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (the Fund) is soliciting comments concerning the ‘‘New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) Program—Allocation Application’’ (hereafter, the Application). DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 2, 2009 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to Matthew Josephs, NMTC Program Manager, Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, U.S. Department of the Treasury, 601 13th Street, NW., Suite 200 South, Washington, DC 20005, by e-mail to cdfihelp@cdfi.treas.gov, or by facsimile to (202) 622–7754. Please note this is not a toll free number. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Application and the NMTC Program Notice of Allocation Availability (NOAA) for the FY 2009 allocation round (74 FR 4077, January 22, 2009) may be obtained from the NMTC Program page of the Fund’s Web site at https://www.cdfifund.gov. Requests for additional information should be directed to Matthew Josephs, NMTC Program Manager, Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, U.S. Department of the Treasury, 601 13th Street, NW., Suite 200 South, Washington, DC 20005, by e-mail to cdfihelp@cdfi.treas.gov, or by facsimile to (202) 622–7754. Please note this is not a toll free number. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title: New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) Program—Allocation Application. OMB Number: 1559–0016. Abstract: Title I, subtitle C, section 121 of the Community Renewal Tax Relief Act of 2000 (the Act), as enacted in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554, December 21, 2000), amended the Internal Revenue PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Code (IRC) by adding IRC § 45D and created the NMTC Program. The Department of the Treasury, through the Fund, administers the NMTC Program, which provides an incentive to investors in the form of tax credits over seven years, which is expected to stimulate the provision of private investment capital that, in turn, will facilitate economic and community development in low-income communities. In order to receive the tax credit, taxpayers make Qualified Equity Investments (QEIs) in Community Development Entities (CDEs): substantially all of the QEI proceeds must in turn be used by the CDE to provide investments in businesses and real estate developments in low-income communities. The tax credit provided to the investor totals 39 percent of the amount of the investment and is claimed over a seven-year period. In each of the first three years, the investor receives a credit equal to five percent of the total amount paid for the stock or capital interest at the time of purchase. For the final four years, the value of the credit is six percent annually. Investors may not redeem their investments in CDEs prior to the conclusion of the seven-year period without forfeiting any credit amounts they have received. The Fund is responsible for certifying organizations as CDEs, and administering the competitive allocation of tax credit authority to CDEs, which it does through annual allocation rounds. As part of the award selection process, all CDEs are required to prepare and submit the Application, which includes four key sections (Business Strategy; Community Impact; Management Capacity; and Capitalization Strategy). During the first phase of the review process, each Application is rated and scored independently by three different readers. In scoring each Application, reviewers rate each of the four evaluation sections as follows: Weak (0– 5 points); Limited (6–10 points); Average (11–15 points); Good (16–20 points); and Excellent (21–25 points). Applications can be awarded up to ten additional ‘‘priority’’ points for demonstrating a track record of serving disadvantaged business and communities and/or for committing to make investments in projects owned by unrelated parties. If one or more of the three readers provides an anomalous score, and it is determined that such an anomaly would affect the outcome of the final awardee pool, then a fourth reviewer will score the Application, and the anomalous score would likely be dropped. E:\FR\FM\03AUN1.SGM 03AUN1 sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 147 / Monday, August 3, 2009 / Notices Once all of the scores have been finalized, including anomaly score adjustments, those Applications that meet minimum aggregate scoring thresholds in each of the four major review sections (as well as a minimum overall scoring threshold) are eligible to be considered for an allocation. They are reviewed by an internal Fund panel, with a Lead Panelist making an award recommendation to a Panel Manager, and the Panel Manager making an award recommendation to the Selecting Official. If the Selecting Official’s award recommendation varies significantly from the recommendation of the Panel Manager, then a Reviewing Official makes the final award determination. Awards are made, in descending order of the final rank score, until the available allocation authority for a given round is fully expended. Current Actions: Preparing for the upcoming FY 2010 NMTC Program allocation round. Type of Review: Extension. Affected Public: CDEs seeking NMTC Program allocation authority. Estimated Number of Respondents: 249. Estimated Annual Time per Respondent: 200 hours. Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 49,800 hours. Requests for Comments: Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval. All comments will become a matter of public record and may be published on the Fund Web site at https://www.cdfifund.gov. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services required to provide information. The Fund specifically requests comments concerning the Application, Application review process, and the following questions: 1. Is the information that is currently collected by the Application necessary and appropriate for the Fund to consider for the purpose of making award decisions? Please consider each VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:05 Jul 31, 2009 Jkt 217001 question and table in the Application. Are there questions or tables that are redundant and/or unnecessary? Should additional questions or tables be added to ensure collection of more relevant information? 2. Are the thresholds contained in Question 17 of the Application appropriate, given current economic conditions? If not, what should the criteria include? Should the Fund provide a range of flexible product commitments based on a discount of interest rates below market as defined by basis point reductions (or other product flexibilities) or continue to present commitment options in percentage terms? 3. A CDE is entitled to earn five ‘‘priority points’’ for committing to invest substantially all of its QEI proceeds in businesses in which persons unrelated to the CDE hold the majority equity interest (within the meaning of I.R.C. section 267(b) or 707(b)(1)). With respect to the timing of this test, the CDFI Fund has determined that it is to be applied after the initial investment is made, and for the life of the seven-year compliance period (though an exception is permitted if events unforeseen at the time of the initial investment cause the CDE to have to subsequently take a controlling interest in the business). Is it appropriate that this test is applied after the investment is made, or should the CDFI consider applying this test before the investment is made? If the test is to be applied before the investment is made, then how should the Fund treat circumstances whereby the receipt of the QEI and the investment in the business is essentially a simultaneous transaction, particularly when the CDE may not have any owners identified prior to the QEI closing? 4. The Application currently collects outcome information on the applicant’s historic community impacts and projected economic development impacts in Table C1 and Table C2, respectively, and collects information on projected community development impacts in Question 30. Are there changes that should be made in the way projected economic development is currently measured? Are there other outcomes/impacts for which the Fund should be collecting information to ensure effective use of the NMTC? Should the Fund have a greater focus on community development outcomes/ impacts? Alternatively, should the Fund focus exclusively on economic development outcomes/impacts? 5. Do Question 56 and Table F1 of the Application capture all sources of compensation and profits that the PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 38483 applicant and its affiliates receive in connection with NMTC transactions? How can collection of this information be improved? How should the Fund use this information? For example, should the Fund make the applicant’s stated fees a specific condition of the Allocation Agreement, and should the Fund set limits on fees in the Allocation Agreement? 6. In any given Application round, the Fund requires applicants that have received awards in previous rounds to demonstrate that they have been able to raise minimum threshold amounts of QEIs from their prior awards (see the 2009 NOAA for the current minimum threshold requirements). Are these current minimum threshold requirements sufficient? Should the Fund consider using different measurements, such as the amount of QEIs that have been deployed as investments in low-income communities? 7. The Fund generally caps award amounts to any one organization in a given round. In the 2009 Application round, this cap was set at $125 million. Is this an appropriate amount? Should the Fund consider raising the cap significantly (e.g., to $250 million), and prohibit a CDE that receives such a large allocation award from applying again for an established period of time? 8. In April 2009, the Government Accountability Office released a report titled: ‘‘New Markets Tax Credit: Minority Entities Are Less Successful in Obtaining Awards than Non-Minority Entities’’ (GAO–09–536). Are there actions that the Fund should take in order to increase the number of minority CDE applicants and allocatees? 9. Are there changes that can be made to the application process or elsewhere, that will increase the amount of Qualified Low-Income Community Investments that support activities that have not traditionally received large scale financing from NMTC investment proceeds (e.g., loans and investments for small business operations; loans to and investments in other CDEs, including CDFIs; purchase of loans from other CDEs; etc.)? 10. Currently, the Fund uses economic distress factors from the most recent decennial census to qualify eligible census tracts and to verify, when applicable, that awardees are serving ‘‘severely’’ distressed communities. Are there other public sources of data on economic indicators (e.g., American Community Survey three- and five-year estimates for poverty rate, area median income, and unemployment rate) that are updated E:\FR\FM\03AUN1.SGM 03AUN1 38484 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 147 / Monday, August 3, 2009 / Notices more frequently and readily available that the Fund should accept? DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Authority: 26 U.S.C. 45D; 31 U.S.C. 321; 26 CFR 1.45D–1. Departmental Offices; Privacy Act of 1974, as Amended Dated: July 28, 2009. Donna J. Gambrell, Director, Community Development Financial Institutions Fund. [FR Doc. E9–18525 Filed 7–31–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810–70–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Senior Executive Service; Social Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program; Performance Review Board Treasury Department. Notice of members of the SIGTARP Performance Review Board. AGENCY: sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES ACTION: SUMMARY: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4), this notice announces the appointment of members of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program Performance Review Board (PRB). The purpose of this Board is to review and make recommendations concerning proposed performance appraisals, ratings, bonuses and other appropriate personnel actions for incumbents of SES positions in SIGTARP. The Board will perform PRB functions for other bureau positions if requested. Compostion of SIGTARP PRB: The Board shall consist of at least three members. In the case of an appraisal of a career appointee, more than half the members shall consist of career appointees. The names and titles of the Board members are as follows: Kevin Puvalowski, Deputy Special Inspector General. Dr. Eileen Ennis, Deputy Special Inspector General, Operations. Barry Holman, Deputy Special Inspector General, Audit. Christopher Sharply, Deputy Special Inspector General, Investigations. Brian Saddler, Chief Counsel to the Special Inspector General. DATES: Effective Date: Membership is effective on the date of this notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sally Ruble, Human Resources Specialist, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220, Telephone: 202 927–9457. Dated: July 24, 2009. Deborah Mason, Director, Human Resources, Operations Division. [FR Doc. E9–18200 Filed 7–31–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE M VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:05 Jul 31, 2009 Jkt 217001 AGENCY: Departmental Offices, Treasury. Notice of Proposed New Privacy Act System of Records for the Home Affordable Modification Program. ACTION: SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), the U.S. Department of the Treasury (‘‘Treasury’’ or the ‘‘Department’’) is giving notice that it proposes to establish a new system of records necessary to administer the Home Affordable Modification Program and related homeownership preservation programs (‘‘HAMP’’). DATES: We have requested that OMB waive eight days of its review period for this system of records. If OMB grants the waiver, the system of records is effective upon publication in the Federal Register; if OMB does not grant the waiver, we will implement the system on September 14, 2009. In any event, we will not disclose any information under a routine use until 32 days after publication. We may defer implementation of this system of records or one or more of the routine use statements listed below if we receive comments that persuade us to defer implementation. Comments must be received no later than September 4, 2009. Comments should be sent to the Deputy Assistant Secretary Fiscal Operations and Policy, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220. The Department will make such comments available for public inspection and copying in the Department’s Library, Room 1428, Main Treasury Building, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time. You can make an appointment to inspect comments by telephoning (202) 622–0990. All comments, including attachments and other supporting materials received are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. ADDRESSES: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theodore R. Kowalsky, Manager, Data & Information Technology, Office of Fiscal & Financial Agents, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220, 202–927– 9445 or at Ted.Kowalsky@do.treas.gov. PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 The Department established HAMP, pursuant to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110– 343), to enable eligible homeowners who have a record of making timely mortgage payments, but are experiencing hardships in doing so, to modify the principal amounts and interest rates of their mortgage loans. HAMP facilitates such mortgage loan modifications by providing subsidies to mortgage loan servicers who agree to them. The Department administers HAMP with the assistance of designated Financial Agents. The Department establishes this new system of records to provide Treasury and its Financial Agents with access to information about mortgage borrowers and their respective home mortgage loans that is necessary to determine whether, and to what extent, borrowers qualify for loan modification assistance. The report of this new system of records, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(r) of the Privacy Act, has been submitted to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and the Office of Management and Budget, pursuant to Appendix I to OMB Circular A–130, ‘‘Federal Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals,’’ dated November 30, 2000. The proposed new system of records, entitled ‘‘Home Affordable Modification Program—Treasury/DO .218,’’ is published in its entirety below. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dated: July 28, 2009. Melissa Hartman, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary, Privacy and Treasury Records. TREASURY/DO .218 SYSTEM NAME: Home Affordable Modification Program Records—Treasury/DO. SYSTEM LOCATION: The Office of Financial Stability, Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC. Other facilities that maintain this system of records are located in Urbana, MD and at a backup facility located in Reston, VA. Both facilities belong to the Federal National Mortgage Association (‘‘Fannie Mae’’), which has been designated as a Financial Agent for HAMP. CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM: This system of records contains information about mortgage borrowers that is submitted to the Department or E:\FR\FM\03AUN1.SGM 03AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 147 (Monday, August 3, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38482-38484]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18525]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Notice and Request for Comments

AGENCY: Community Development Financial Institutions Fund.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing 
effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general 
public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment 
on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 
3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the Community Development Financial 
Institutions Fund (the Fund) is soliciting comments concerning the 
``New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) Program--Allocation Application'' 
(hereafter, the Application).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 2, 2009 
to be assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to Matthew Josephs, NMTC Program 
Manager, Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, U.S. 
Department of the Treasury, 601 13th Street, NW., Suite 200 South, 
Washington, DC 20005, by e-mail to cdfihelp@cdfi.treas.gov, or by 
facsimile to (202) 622-7754. Please note this is not a toll free 
number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Application and the NMTC Program 
Notice of Allocation Availability (NOAA) for the FY 2009 allocation 
round (74 FR 4077, January 22, 2009) may be obtained from the NMTC 
Program page of the Fund's Web site at https://www.cdfifund.gov. 
Requests for additional information should be directed to Matthew 
Josephs, NMTC Program Manager, Community Development Financial 
Institutions Fund, U.S. Department of the Treasury, 601 13th Street, 
NW., Suite 200 South, Washington, DC 20005, by e-mail to 
cdfihelp@cdfi.treas.gov, or by facsimile to (202) 622-7754. Please note 
this is not a toll free number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Title: New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) Program--Allocation 
Application.
    OMB Number: 1559-0016.
    Abstract: Title I, subtitle C, section 121 of the Community Renewal 
Tax Relief Act of 2000 (the Act), as enacted in the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554, December 21, 2000), amended 
the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) by adding IRC Sec.  45D and created the 
NMTC Program. The Department of the Treasury, through the Fund, 
administers the NMTC Program, which provides an incentive to investors 
in the form of tax credits over seven years, which is expected to 
stimulate the provision of private investment capital that, in turn, 
will facilitate economic and community development in low-income 
communities. In order to receive the tax credit, taxpayers make 
Qualified Equity Investments (QEIs) in Community Development Entities 
(CDEs): substantially all of the QEI proceeds must in turn be used by 
the CDE to provide investments in businesses and real estate 
developments in low-income communities.
    The tax credit provided to the investor totals 39 percent of the 
amount of the investment and is claimed over a seven-year period. In 
each of the first three years, the investor receives a credit equal to 
five percent of the total amount paid for the stock or capital interest 
at the time of purchase. For the final four years, the value of the 
credit is six percent annually. Investors may not redeem their 
investments in CDEs prior to the conclusion of the seven-year period 
without forfeiting any credit amounts they have received.
    The Fund is responsible for certifying organizations as CDEs, and 
administering the competitive allocation of tax credit authority to 
CDEs, which it does through annual allocation rounds. As part of the 
award selection process, all CDEs are required to prepare and submit 
the Application, which includes four key sections (Business Strategy; 
Community Impact; Management Capacity; and Capitalization Strategy). 
During the first phase of the review process, each Application is rated 
and scored independently by three different readers.
    In scoring each Application, reviewers rate each of the four 
evaluation sections as follows: Weak (0-5 points); Limited (6-10 
points); Average (11-15 points); Good (16-20 points); and Excellent 
(21-25 points). Applications can be awarded up to ten additional 
``priority'' points for demonstrating a track record of serving 
disadvantaged business and communities and/or for committing to make 
investments in projects owned by unrelated parties. If one or more of 
the three readers provides an anomalous score, and it is determined 
that such an anomaly would affect the outcome of the final awardee 
pool, then a fourth reviewer will score the Application, and the 
anomalous score would likely be dropped.

[[Page 38483]]

    Once all of the scores have been finalized, including anomaly score 
adjustments, those Applications that meet minimum aggregate scoring 
thresholds in each of the four major review sections (as well as a 
minimum overall scoring threshold) are eligible to be considered for an 
allocation. They are reviewed by an internal Fund panel, with a Lead 
Panelist making an award recommendation to a Panel Manager, and the 
Panel Manager making an award recommendation to the Selecting Official. 
If the Selecting Official's award recommendation varies significantly 
from the recommendation of the Panel Manager, then a Reviewing Official 
makes the final award determination. Awards are made, in descending 
order of the final rank score, until the available allocation authority 
for a given round is fully expended.
    Current Actions: Preparing for the upcoming FY 2010 NMTC Program 
allocation round.
    Type of Review: Extension.
    Affected Public: CDEs seeking NMTC Program allocation authority.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 249.
    Estimated Annual Time per Respondent: 200 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 49,800 hours.
    Requests for Comments: Comments submitted in response to this 
notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of 
Management and Budget approval. All comments will become a matter of 
public record and may be published on the Fund Web site at https://www.cdfifund.gov. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection 
of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions 
of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical 
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the 
collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, 
and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize 
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including 
through the use of technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up 
costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services 
required to provide information.
    The Fund specifically requests comments concerning the Application, 
Application review process, and the following questions:
    1. Is the information that is currently collected by the 
Application necessary and appropriate for the Fund to consider for the 
purpose of making award decisions? Please consider each question and 
table in the Application. Are there questions or tables that are 
redundant and/or unnecessary? Should additional questions or tables be 
added to ensure collection of more relevant information?
    2. Are the thresholds contained in Question 17 of the Application 
appropriate, given current economic conditions? If not, what should the 
criteria include? Should the Fund provide a range of flexible product 
commitments based on a discount of interest rates below market as 
defined by basis point reductions (or other product flexibilities) or 
continue to present commitment options in percentage terms?
    3. A CDE is entitled to earn five ``priority points'' for 
committing to invest substantially all of its QEI proceeds in 
businesses in which persons unrelated to the CDE hold the majority 
equity interest (within the meaning of I.R.C. section 267(b) or 
707(b)(1)). With respect to the timing of this test, the CDFI Fund has 
determined that it is to be applied after the initial investment is 
made, and for the life of the seven-year compliance period (though an 
exception is permitted if events unforeseen at the time of the initial 
investment cause the CDE to have to subsequently take a controlling 
interest in the business). Is it appropriate that this test is applied 
after the investment is made, or should the CDFI consider applying this 
test before the investment is made? If the test is to be applied before 
the investment is made, then how should the Fund treat circumstances 
whereby the receipt of the QEI and the investment in the business is 
essentially a simultaneous transaction, particularly when the CDE may 
not have any owners identified prior to the QEI closing?
    4. The Application currently collects outcome information on the 
applicant's historic community impacts and projected economic 
development impacts in Table C1 and Table C2, respectively, and 
collects information on projected community development impacts in 
Question 30. Are there changes that should be made in the way projected 
economic development is currently measured? Are there other outcomes/
impacts for which the Fund should be collecting information to ensure 
effective use of the NMTC? Should the Fund have a greater focus on 
community development outcomes/impacts? Alternatively, should the Fund 
focus exclusively on economic development outcomes/impacts?
    5. Do Question 56 and Table F1 of the Application capture all 
sources of compensation and profits that the applicant and its 
affiliates receive in connection with NMTC transactions? How can 
collection of this information be improved? How should the Fund use 
this information? For example, should the Fund make the applicant's 
stated fees a specific condition of the Allocation Agreement, and 
should the Fund set limits on fees in the Allocation Agreement?
    6. In any given Application round, the Fund requires applicants 
that have received awards in previous rounds to demonstrate that they 
have been able to raise minimum threshold amounts of QEIs from their 
prior awards (see the 2009 NOAA for the current minimum threshold 
requirements). Are these current minimum threshold requirements 
sufficient? Should the Fund consider using different measurements, such 
as the amount of QEIs that have been deployed as investments in low-
income communities?
    7. The Fund generally caps award amounts to any one organization in 
a given round. In the 2009 Application round, this cap was set at $125 
million. Is this an appropriate amount? Should the Fund consider 
raising the cap significantly (e.g., to $250 million), and prohibit a 
CDE that receives such a large allocation award from applying again for 
an established period of time?
    8. In April 2009, the Government Accountability Office released a 
report titled: ``New Markets Tax Credit: Minority Entities Are Less 
Successful in Obtaining Awards than Non-Minority Entities'' (GAO-09-
536). Are there actions that the Fund should take in order to increase 
the number of minority CDE applicants and allocatees?
    9. Are there changes that can be made to the application process or 
elsewhere, that will increase the amount of Qualified Low-Income 
Community Investments that support activities that have not 
traditionally received large scale financing from NMTC investment 
proceeds (e.g., loans and investments for small business operations; 
loans to and investments in other CDEs, including CDFIs; purchase of 
loans from other CDEs; etc.)?
    10. Currently, the Fund uses economic distress factors from the 
most recent decennial census to qualify eligible census tracts and to 
verify, when applicable, that awardees are serving ``severely'' 
distressed communities. Are there other public sources of data on 
economic indicators (e.g., American Community Survey three- and five-
year estimates for poverty rate, area median income, and unemployment 
rate) that are updated

[[Page 38484]]

more frequently and readily available that the Fund should accept?

    Authority:  26 U.S.C. 45D; 31 U.S.C. 321; 26 CFR 1.45D-1.

    Dated: July 28, 2009.
Donna J. Gambrell,
Director, Community Development Financial Institutions Fund.
[FR Doc. E9-18525 Filed 7-31-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-70-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.