| CONWAY NATIONAL BANK 
 September 28, 2004  Mr. Robert E. FeldmanExecutive 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 the Compliance Officer and CRA Officer of The Conway National 
        Bank in Horry County (the largest of the 46 counties in South Carolina, 
        area-wise) and have been since the positions were created. My bank’s 
        assets are $660 million. I have been through both the small and large 
        CRA examinations by my primary regulator, the OCC. I strongly support 
        the FDIC’s leadership role in its proposal to raise the threshold to $1 
        billion for the streamlined small bank CRA examination. This would 
        greatly relieve the regulatory burden currently imposed on small banks 
        throughout our great nation, not just in metropolitan areas.  I also support the FDIC’s proposal to change the definition of 
        “community development,” which only focuses on low- and moderate-income 
        area residents, to include rural residents. During my previous CRA 
        examination by the OCC, a one million dollar loan to a public utility 
        authority for the purpose of furnishing water to rural areas of our 
        community (which includes a number of low- to moderate-income families) 
        did not qualify under current CD criteria.  On June 25, 1992, I addressed the Federal Financial Institutions 
        Examination Council in Washington, D.C., concerning regulatory burden in 
        the banking industry. As I stated then concerning regulation of the 
        banking industry, I am reiterating now: Listen to the people in the 
        trenches: the banking officers. We know our business.  As we all know, what was once accepted by society is no longer 
        accepted. Prior to my employment with CNB in 1975, I was a seasoned 
        consumer lender, having begun my career in 1965, when the following 
        practices were standard in the industry:  - As a debt collector in the mid 1960s, I phoned and visited people 
        at three o’clock in the morning (FDCPA) – things have changed…- As a loan officer in the late 1960s, I asked young females what kind 
        of birth control practices they used (ECOA) – things have changed…
 - I saw add-on interest rates of six percent compared with simple 
        interest rates of six percent (TIL) – things have changed…
 - I saw ghetto areas red-lined in the late 1960s and early 1970s (CRA) – 
        again, things have changed...
 The banking industry is highly competitive; as society changes, the 
        banking industry changes with it, as previously mentioned (albeit 
        sometimes prodded by legislation as all industries are).  From December 15, 2003, through July 14, 2004, the OCC completed 321 
        CRA evaluations on community banks. The breakdown, which I believe would 
        be comparable with the other regulatory agencies, is as follows:
 Substantial Non-compliance: 0Needs to Improve: 2
 Satisfactory and Outstanding: 319
 My calculations indicate that if this is indeed indicative of all 
        banks, then 99.4 percent of regulated banks today may not even need CRA 
        regulations – especially not burdensome ones. Remember that Senator 
        William Proxmire, the main sponsor of the Community Reinvestment Act, 
        said that this law would not increase the paper burden on banks “by one 
        piece of paper”.  Maybe it is time for all the regulators to re-visit the burdensome 
        requirements of CRA – things have changed.  Respectfully,A. Mitchell Godwin
 Vice President
 CC: OCCFRB
 ABA
 ICBA
 SCBA
 
 |