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

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

“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
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 6 comments
  • HarveyBirdman 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.

  • Mpc220 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.

  • 1995 SC At least you can still get one. There isn't much for Ford folks to be happy about nowadays, but the existence of the Mustang and the fact that the lessons from back in the 90s when Ford tried to kill it and replace it with the then flavor of the day seem to have been learned (the only lessons they seem to remember) are a win not only for Ford folks but for car people in general. One day my Super Coupe will pop its headgaskets (I know it will...I read it on the Internet). I hope I will still be physically up to dropping the supercharged Terminator Cobra motor into it. in all seriousness, The Mustang is a.win for car guys.
  • Lorenzo Heh. The major powers, military or economic, set up these regulators for the smaller countries - the big guys do what they want, and always have. Are the Chinese that unaware?
  • Lorenzo The original 4-Runner, by its very name, promised something different in the future. What happened?
  • Lorenzo At my age, excitement is dangerous. one thing to note: the older models being displayed are more stylish than their current versions, and the old Subaru Forester looks more utilitarian than the current version. I thought the annual model change was dead.
  • Lorenzo Well, it was never an off-roader, much less a military vehicle, so let the people with too much money play make believe.
Next