|  First State Bank and Trust Company
 Mr. Robert E. Feldman
 Executive Secretary
 Attention: Comments/Legal ESS
 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
 550 17th Street, NW
 Washington, DC 20429
  RE: Rin Number 3064-AC50: FDIC Proposed Increase in the Threshold
            for the Small Bank CRA Streamlined Examination
 Dear Mr. Feldman: I am Executive
              Vice President of First State Bank and Trust Company, located in
              Fremont, NE,
              a micropolitan community of 26,000 residents.
            My bank is $150,000,000 and we are not subject to the large bank
            examination. I am writing to strongly support the FDIC’s proposal
            to raise the threshold for the streamlined small bank CRA examination
            to $1 billion without regard to the size of the bank’s holding
            company. This would greatly relieve the regulatory burden imposed
            on many small banks such as my own under the current regulation,
            which are required to meet the standards imposed on the nation’s
            largest $1 trillion banks. I understand that this is not an exemption
            from CRA and that my bank would still have to help meet the credit
            needs of its entire community and be evaluated by my regulator. However,
            I believe that this would help lower current regulatory burden in
            our industry. I also support
              the addition of a community development criterion to the small
              bank examination
              for larger community banks. It appears
            to be a significant improvement over the investment test. However,
            I urge the FDIC to adopt its original $500 million threshold for
            small banks without a CD criterion and only apply the new CD criterion
            to community banks greater than $500 million up to $1 billion. Banks
            under $500 million now hold about the same percent of overall industry
            assets as community banks under $250 million did a decade ago when
            the revised CRA regulations were adopted, so this adjustment in the
            CRA threshold is appropriate. As FDIC examiners know, it has proven
            extremely difficult for small banks, especially those in rural areas,
            to find appropriate CRA qualified investments in their communities.
            Many small banks have had to make regional or statewide investments
            that are extremely unlikely to ever benefit the banks’ own
            communities. That was certainly not the intent of Congress when it
            enacted CRA.  An additional
              reason to support the FDIC’s CD criterion is
            that it significantly reduces the current regulation’s “cliff
            effect.” Today, when a small bank goes over $250 million, it
            must completely reorganize its CRA program and begin a massive new
            reporting, monitoring and investment program. If the FDIC adopts
            its proposal, a state nonmember 
            bank would move from the small bank examination to an expanded but
              still streamlined small bank examination, with the flexibility
              to mix Community Development loans, services and investments to
              meet the new CD criterion. This would be far more appropriate to
              the size of the bank, and far better than subjecting the community
              bank to the same large bank examination that applies to $1 trillion
              banks. This more graduated transition to the large bank examination
            is a significant improvement over the current regulation.  I strongly oppose
              making the CD criterion a separate test from the bank’s overall CRA evaluation. For a community bank, CD lending
            is not significantly different from the provision of credit to the
            entire community. The current small bank test considers the institution’s
            overall lending in its community. The addition of a category of CD
            lending (and services to aid lending and investments as a substitute
            for lending) fits well within the concept of serving the whole community.
            A separate test would create an additional CD obligation and regulatory
            burden that would erode the benefit of the streamlined exam. Our
            previous two examinations indicate that we are doing what is possible
            to be done to serve our community. In conclusion, I believe that the FDIC has proposed a major improvement
            in the CRA regulations, one that much more closely aligns the regulations
            with the Community Reinvestment Act itself, and I urge the FDIC to
            adopt its proposal, with the recommendations above. I will be happy
            to discuss these issues further with you, if that would be helpful. Sincerely, Charles P. JohannsenExecutive Vice President
  
 |