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