Bailout Watch 152: Department of Energy Releases $25b Bailout Regs

by Robert Farago

Published: November 6th, 2008

bailout watch 152 department of energy releases 25b bailout regs

“DOE would like to invite you [ED: who shall remain nameless] to participate in a conference call for industry stakeholders on the new Interim Final Rule for the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program issued this evening. The program was authorized by Section 136 in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. The FY09 Continuing Resolution authorized up to $25 billion in direct loans. The press release is attached. The Interim Final Rule is posted at http://www.atvmloan.energy.gov/.” Interim Final Rule? Yeah, that sounds like the feds alright. Anyway, while I scan the pdf myself, I once again invite TTAC’s Best and Brightest to cast their collective beady eye on this doc, which was allegedly going to take over a year to produce. I guess it pays to have high friends in low places. Right. Let’s get stuck in…

Here’s a good bit about the widely-reported (ish) rule regarding a borrower’s financial health, from page 14: “In today’s interim final rule, the Department interprets the term ‘financially viable’ to mean that an applicant must demonstrate a reasonable prospect that the Applicant will be able to make payments of principle and interest on the loan as and when payments come due under the terms of the loan document, and that the applicant has a net present value which is positive, taking all costs, existing and future, into account.” There’s more along those lines– the recipients must be viable without federal funding— but WTF? If the money is restricted to automakers who are viable, Detroit doesn’t qualify. Period.

At the moment, the money is still available only for the direct engineering and retooling costs to create vehicles that are 25 percent more fuel-efficient than vehicles “with substantially similar attributes.” [page 19, examples on page 26] And you know that dual-fuel CAFE credit nonsense that boosts a vehicle’s mileage figures without boosting its actual mileage? Forgeddaboutit. [page 20]

In keeping with automotive product cycles and federal largesse, the loan principal may be deferred entirely for five years. Interest payments must proceed apace. [page 29] And the DOE has first lien on all property secured with the loan, and all assets used to secure the loan. In other words, if any of the borrowers go belly-up, the DOE is first in line for the aforementioned assets (sorry my head’s starting to spin). [page 30]

The loans can only be used for 80 percent of the cost of a new vehicle program. [page 32] And the D.O.E. ain’t gonna just hand over the readies; they’re going to evaluate the viability of the finished product (nice to know our regulators are now in the car biz). [page 33]

I think those are the “highlights.” My takeaway is simple enough. Detroit was right: this is NOT a bailout. Unless Motown’s fixers can fix the wording in this loan program to subvert the legislator’s original intentions, the $25b loans will do sweet F.A. to rescue American automakers from the right-here-right-now cash conflagration engulfing them. What’s more, I can’t find any language restricting these loans to 20-years-old or older factories. So, theoretically at least, this program will be stretched a lot thinner than we may have first believed.

Personally, this leaves me wondering: can a person be allergic to legislative documents?

Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 6 comments

HarveyBirdman on Nov 06, 2008

Yes, RF, a person can be allergic to legislative documents, but if an attorney is diagnosed with such an ailment, unemployment is in the not-too-distant future. It's a remarkably short period for the feds to get an interim rule on the books; I've never seen anything quite like it. If I can't sleep tonight, maybe I'll dissect the rule and do a little write-up or something. Nothing like federal regs to cure insomnia. In the meantime, all I can say is that the existing secured creditors must be pissed by getting pushed back in line. I wonder if some creditors will be tempted to force Ch. 11 before the fed money starts gushing into Detroit's coffers, just to be sure there's some meat left on the carcass.

Like Reply
Mpc220 on Nov 07, 2008

So far, I kinda like it. It doesn't seem like the blatant BS giveaway we thought it would be. It's still completely unnecessary, sure, but at least it's not quite an outright gift.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

3-On-The-Tree I have a 2009 C6 Corvette LS3 and the only major repair that I have done on it was replace the radiator. Besides usual plugs, wires oil etc. And yes those tires are expensive as well.
28-Cars-Later We had a red 2003 with less than 100 miles in late 2004/5ish and kept it till the end AFAIK. I do recall being told we had about $28,000 in at the time (about $43,6 in 2023 Clown World Bux). I don't ever recall anyone retail even looking at it, and it lived in the showroom/garage."It's an automatic that just had the linkage repaired and upgraded"This really doesn't bode well. Maybe there's a upgrade I'm simply not aware of so one could tune the 3rd Gen LM4 for higher power but messing with it isn't making me smile because now I know its no longer factory or somehow it broke and with such low miles I'm equally concerned.
Analoggrotto With Kia Hyundai you are guaranteed to have the best Maintenance and Service experience in the industry. Complementary diagnostics, open book fees schedules and adherence to published rates with no attempts to tack extra work on are part of the HMC Gold Standard of Service. Recalls are the lowest in the industry but when you bring your Hyundai Genesis Kia vehicle in for Feature Improvement, rest assured that it will be taken care of to the highest pentagon standards, fully free of charge with no pressure for paid work or service unless requested. Hyundai Kia have the highest levels of customer ATP loyalty in the industry and Service is key to the best after sales experience.
MaintenanceCosts In Toyota's hands, these hybrid powertrains with a single motor and a conventional automatic transmission have not been achieving the same kind of fuel economy benefits as the planetary-gear setups in the smaller cars. It's too bad. Many years ago GM did a group of full-size pickups and SUVs with a 6.0L V8 and a two-motor planetary gear system, and those got the fuel economy boost you'd expect while maintaining big-time towing capacity. Toyota should have done the same with its turbo four and six in the new trucks.
JMII My C7 isn't too bad maintain wise but it requires 10 quarts of expensive 0W-40 once a year (per GM) and tires are pricey due size and grip requirements. I average about $600 a year in maintenance but a majority of that is due to track usage. Brake fluid, brake pads and tires add up quickly. Wiper blades, coolant flush, transmission fluid, rear diff fluid and a new battery were the other costs. I bought the car in 2018 with 18k in mileage and now it has 42k. Many of the items mentioned are needed between 20k and 40k per GM's service schedule so my ownership period just happens to align with various intervals.I really need to go thru my service spreadsheet and put track related items on a separate tab to get a better picture of what "normal" cost would be. Its likely 75% of my spend is track related.Repairs to date are only $350. I needed a new XM antenna (aftermarket), a cargo net clip, a backup lamp switch and new LED side markers (aftermarket). The LEDs were the most expensive at $220.