| FIRST BANK AND TRUST CO. 
        From: Susan Vanbuskirk [mailto:Vanbuskirk@1stbanknet.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 12:29 PM
 To: Comments
 Subject: CRA/MPR dated 9/20
 September 15, 2004  Mr. Robert E. FeldmanExecutive Secretary
 Attention: Comments/Legal ESS
 FDIC
 550 17th Street, NW
 Washington, DC 20429
 Dear Mr. Feldman:  My name is Susan Van Buskirk. I am Auditor and Assistant Vice 
        President for First Bank and Trust Co. in Duncan, Oklahoma. We have 
        branches in Healdton, Ardmore, and Norman, Oklahoma. We are a $250 
        million bank. I am writing to strongly support the FDIC's proposal to 
        raise the threshold for the streamlined small bank CRA exam 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 ours under the current regulation. I understand this is not an 
        exemption from CRA and that my bank would still have to help meet the 
        credit needs of our entire communities and be evaluated by regulators. 
        However, I believe that this would lower our current regulatory burden 
        immensely.  I also support the addition of a community development criterion to 
        the small bank exam 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 percentage of overall industry assets as 
        community banks under $250 million did a decade ago when the revised CRA 
        regs were adopted. Thus, this adjustment 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 those small, rural communities. Many small banks have had 
        to make regional or statewide investments that are extremely unlikely to 
        ever benefit the banks' own communities. That could not have been the 
        intent of Congress when it enacted CRA.  Another reason to support the FDIC's CD criterion is that it 
        significantly reduces the current reg'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 sometimes as much as two years in advance. 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 exam, 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 exam 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.  In conclusion, I believe that the FDIC has proposed a major 
        improvement in the CRA regs, one that much more closely aligns the regs 
        with the CRA Act itself. I urge the FDIC to adopt its proposal with the 
        recommendations above. I will be happy to discuss these issues further 
        with you if desired.  Sincerely,  S. Susan Van BuskirkAVP & Auditor
 Xc: CRA file
         Thank You,  S. Susan Van BuskirkAVP & Auditor
 First Bank & Trust Co.
 PO Box 580
 Duncan Ok 73533
 (580) 255-1810 ext. 1059
 svanbuskirk@1stbanknet.com
 
 |