Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; Repeal of the Final Rule and Withdrawal of the Finding of Primary Money Laundering Concern Against VEF Banka, 45689-45690 [2011-19118]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2011 / Rules and Regulations to corporate reorganizations and tax-free liquidations described in section 381(a) that occur on or after August 31, 2011. Approved: July 20, 2011. Steven T. Miller, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement. Emily S. McMahon, Acting Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax Policy). [FR Doc. 2011–19256 Filed 7–29–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830–01–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Financial Crimes Enforcement Network 31 CFR Part 1010 RIN 1506–AA82 Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; Repeal of the Final Rule and Withdrawal of the Finding of Primary Money Laundering Concern Against VEF Banka Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (‘‘FinCEN’’), Treasury. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: This document repeals FinCEN’s final rule, ‘‘Imposition of Special Measure Against VEF Banka’’ of July 13, 2006, and withdraws the finding of VEF Banka as a Financial Institution of Primary Money Laundering Concern of April 26, 2005, issued pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 5318A of the Bank Secrecy Act (the ‘‘BSA’’). DATES: Effective Date: August 1, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regulatory Policy and Programs Division, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, (800) 949–2732 and select Option 1. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: I. Background emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES A. Statutory Provisions On October 26, 2001, the President signed into law the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, Public Law 107–56 (‘‘USA PATRIOT Act’’). Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act amends the anti-money laundering provisions of the BSA, codified at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12 U.S.C. 1951–1959, and 31 U.S.C. 5311–5314 and 5316–5332, to promote the prevention, detection, and prosecution of money laundering and the financing of terrorism. Regulations implementing the BSA appear at 31 CFR VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:27 Jul 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 Chapter X.1 The authority of the Secretary of the Treasury (the ‘‘Secretary’’) to administer the BSA and its implementing regulations has been delegated to the Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.2 Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act (‘‘section 311’’) added Section 5318A to the BSA, granting the Secretary the authority, upon finding that reasonable grounds exist for concluding that a foreign jurisdiction, foreign financial institution, class of international transactions, or type of account is of ‘‘primary money laundering concern,’’ to require domestic financial institutions and domestic financial agencies to take certain ‘‘special measures’’ against the primary money laundering concern.3 Taken as a whole, Section 5318A provides the Secretary with a range of options that can be adapted to target specific money laundering and terrorist financing concerns most effectively. These options provide the authority to bring additional and useful pressure on those jurisdictions and institutions that pose money-laundering threats and the ability to take steps to protect the U.S. financial system. Through the imposition of various special measures, FinCEN can: gain more information about the concerned jurisdictions, financial institutions, transactions, and accounts; monitor more effectively the respective jurisdictions, financial institutions, transactions, and accounts; and, ultimately, protect U.S. financial institutions from involvement with jurisdictions, financial institutions, transactions, or accounts that pose a money laundering concern. B. VEF Banka At the time of issuance of the final rule on July 13, 2006, VEF Banka was 1 On October 26, 2010, FinCEN issued a final rule creating a new Chapter X in Title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations for the BSA regulations. See 75 FR 65806 (October 26, 2010) (Transfer and Reorganization of Bank Secrecy Act Regulations Final Rule) (referred to herein as the ‘‘Chapter X Final Rule’’). The Chapter X Final Rule became effective on March 1, 2011. 2 Therefore, references to the authority of the Secretary under section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act apply equally to the Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. 3 Available special measures include requiring: (1) Recordkeeping and reporting of certain financial transactions; (2) collection of information relating to beneficial ownership; (3) collection of information relating to certain payable-through accounts; (4) collection of information relating to certain correspondent accounts; and (5) prohibition or conditions on the opening or maintaining of correspondent or payable-through accounts. 31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(1)–(5). For a complete discussion of the range of possible countermeasures, see 68 FR 18917 (April 17, 2003) (proposing to impose special measures against Nauru). PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 45689 headquartered in Riga, Latvia. VEF Banka was one of the smallest of Latvia’s 23 banks, and, in 2004, was reported to have approximately $80 million in assets and 87 employees. Total assets for the bank, as of June 30, 2005, were 27.3 million LATS, equivalent to approximately $47.4 million. VEF Banka had one subsidiary, ¯ Veiksmes lızings, which offered financial leasing and factoring services. In addition to its headquarters in Riga, VEF Banka had one branch in Riga and one representative office in the Czech Republic. VEF Banka offered corporate and private banking services, issued credit cards for non-Latvians, and provided currency exchange through Internet banking services (i.e., virtual currencies). In addition, according to its financial statements, VEF Banka maintained correspondent accounts in countries worldwide, but reported none in the United States at the time of the final rule. II. The Finding, Final Rule, and Subsequent Developments A. The Finding and Final Rule Based upon review and analysis of relevant information, consultations with relevant Federal agencies and departments, and after consideration of the factors enumerated in section 311, the Secretary, through his delegate, the Director of FinCEN, found that reasonable grounds existed for concluding that VEF Banka was a financial institution of primary money laundering concern. This finding was published on April 26, 2005,4 in a notice of proposed rulemaking which proposed prohibiting covered financial institutions from, directly or indirectly, opening or maintaining correspondent accounts in the United States for VEF Banka or any of its branches, offices, or subsidiaries, pursuant to the authority under 31 U.S.C. 5318A. The notice of proposed rulemaking outlined the various factors supporting the finding and proposed prohibition. After consulting with required Federal agencies and parties, reviewing public comments received from the April 26, 2005 notice of proposed rulemaking, and considering additional relevant factors, FinCEN issued a final rule on July 13, 2006 that imposed the special measure authorized under 31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(5) against VEF Banka.5 This final rule requires covered financial institutions to terminate any correspondent or payable-through 4 See 70 FR 21369 (April 26, 2005, RIN 1506– AA82). 5 See 71 FR 39554 (July 13, 2006, RIN 1506– AA82). E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM 01AUR1 45690 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2011 / Rules and Regulations accounts for, or on behalf of, VEF Banka, and to apply due diligence reasonably designed to guard against indirect use of their correspondent or payable-through accounts by VEF Banka. taken by VEF Banka, but are the result of the revocation of VEF Banka’s Latvian banking license and the non-appealable decision by the Riga District Court to liquidate the bank.9 B. VEF Banka’s Subsequent Developments On May 26, 2010, VEF Banka’s Latvian banking regulator, the Financial and Capital Market Commission (the ‘‘FCMC’’), revoked VEF Banka’s operating license on the grounds that the shareholders of the bank had not received authorization from the FCMC for the acquisition of qualifying holdings and the bank failed to ensure compliance with provisions of the Credit Institution Law.6 As a result, the shareholders had no decision-making rights and were unable to ‘‘ensure prudent bank operations.’’ The FCMC’s decision to revoke VEF Banka’s license was confirmed by the Senate of Latvia’s Supreme Court on July 22, 2010 and terminated VEF Banka’s ability to operate as a financial institution under Latvian law.7 On November 15, 2010, the Riga District Court issued a nonappealable order to begin liquidating the bank.8 The liquidation process is expected to be complete in one to two years and will result in the disposition of all of VEF Banka’s assets, including ¯ its subsidiary, Veiksmes lızings. A. Executive Order 12866 It has been determined that this rulemaking is not a significant regulatory action for purposes of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, a regulatory impact analysis is not required. III. Withdrawal of the Finding of Primary Money Laundering Concern Against VEF Banka and Repeal of the Final Rule For the reasons set forth above, FinCEN hereby withdraws the finding of primary money laundering concern against VEF Banka, as published in the Federal Register on April 26, 2005 (70 FR 21369) and finalized on July 13, 2006 (71 FR 39554), as of August 1, 2011. As a result, FinCEN is also repealing the final rule, as published in the Federal Register on July 13, 2006 (71 FR 39554) as 31 CFR 103.192 (now 31 CFR 1010.654), that was based upon the finding. FinCEN’s withdrawal of the finding of primary money laundering concern against VEF Banka and the repeal of the related final rule do not acknowledge any remedial measure IV. Regulatory Matters B. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), Public Law 104–4 (March 22, 1995), requires that an agency prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule that may result in expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. If a budgetary impact statement is required, section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Act also requires an agency to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives before promulgating a rule. FinCEN has determined that it is not required to prepare a written statement under Section 202 and has concluded that on balance the rule provides the most costeffective and least burdensome alternative to achieve the objectives of the rule. C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), FinCEN certifies that this final regulation likely will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The regulatory changes in this final rule merely remove the current obligations for financial institutions under 31 CFR 103.192 (now 31 CFR 1010.654). D. Paperwork Reduction Act This regulation discontinues the Office of Management and Budget Control Number 1506–0041 assigned to the final rule and, as a result, reduces the estimated average burden of one hour per affected financial institution, totaling 5,000 hours. This regulation contains no new information collection requirements subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d) et seq.). List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 1010 Administrative practice and procedure, Banks, banking, Brokers, Currency, Foreign banking, Foreign currencies, Gambling, Investigations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities, Terrorism. Authority and Issuance For the reasons set forth above, 31 CFR part 1010 is amended as follows: PART 1010—GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. The authority citation for 31 CFR part 1010 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1829b and 1951– 1959; 31 U.S.C. 5311–5314 and 5316–5332; title III, sec. 314, Pub. L. 107–56, 115 Stat. 307. § 1010.654 2. Part 1010 is amended by removing § 1010.654. ■ Dated: July 22, 2011. James H. Freis, Jr., Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. [FR Doc. 2011–19118 Filed 7–29–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810–02–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG–2010–1117] RIN 1625–AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Raritan River, Arthur Kill and Their Tributaries, Staten Island, NY and Elizabeth, NJ emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:27 Jul 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 9 The ‘‘Republic of Latvia’’ was described at length in the April 26, 2005 notice of proposed rulemaking, 70 FR 21369, and July 13, 2006 final rule, 71 FR 39554. Today’s repeal of the final rule and withdrawal of the finding of primary money laundering concern against VEF Banka do not provide updates on jurisdictional developments. Further discussion of jurisdictional developments can be found at the U.S. Department of State’s ‘‘2011 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report’’ (http://www.state.gov/p/inl/rls/nrcrpt/ 2011/vol2/156375.htm#latvia). PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Coast Guard, DHS. Final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: 6 ‘‘On Withdrawal of the JSC ‘VEF Banka’s’ Operating Licence,’’ Financial Capital Market Commission press release, May 26, 2010 (http:// www.fktk.lv/en/publications/press_releases/201005-29_on_withdrawal_of_the_jsc/) 7 ‘‘VEF Bank Loses License,’’ The Baltic Times, July 28, 2010 (http://www.baltictimes.com/news/ articles/26661/). 8 ‘‘Court Rule for Liquidation of VEF Banka,’’ The Baltic Course, November 16, 2010 (http:// www.baltic-course.com/eng/finances/ ?doc=33962&underline=vef+banka). [Removed] The Coast Guard has changed the drawbridge operation regulations that govern the operation of the Arthur Kill (AK) Railroad Bridge at mile 11.6, across Arthur Kill between Staten Island, New York and Elizabeth, New Jersey. This final rule provides relief to the bridge owner from crewing their bridge by allowing the bridge to be SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM 01AUR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 147 (Monday, August 1, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45689-45690]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19118]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network

31 CFR Part 1010

RIN 1506-AA82


Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; Repeal of the Final Rule 
and Withdrawal of the Finding of Primary Money Laundering Concern 
Against VEF Banka

AGENCY: Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (``FinCEN''), Treasury.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document repeals FinCEN's final rule, ``Imposition of 
Special Measure Against VEF Banka'' of July 13, 2006, and withdraws the 
finding of VEF Banka as a Financial Institution of Primary Money 
Laundering Concern of April 26, 2005, issued pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 
5318A of the Bank Secrecy Act (the ``BSA'').

DATES: Effective Date: August 1, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regulatory Policy and Programs 
Division, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, (800) 949-2732 and 
select Option 1.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Statutory Provisions

    On October 26, 2001, the President signed into law the Uniting and 
Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to 
Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, Public Law 107-56 (``USA 
PATRIOT Act''). Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act amends the anti-money 
laundering provisions of the BSA, codified at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12 
U.S.C. 1951-1959, and 31 U.S.C. 5311-5314 and 5316-5332, to promote the 
prevention, detection, and prosecution of money laundering and the 
financing of terrorism. Regulations implementing the BSA appear at 31 
CFR Chapter X.\1\ The authority of the Secretary of the Treasury (the 
``Secretary'') to administer the BSA and its implementing regulations 
has been delegated to the Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement 
Network.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On October 26, 2010, FinCEN issued a final rule creating a 
new Chapter X in Title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations for the 
BSA regulations. See 75 FR 65806 (October 26, 2010) (Transfer and 
Reorganization of Bank Secrecy Act Regulations Final Rule) (referred 
to herein as the ``Chapter X Final Rule''). The Chapter X Final Rule 
became effective on March 1, 2011.
    \2\ Therefore, references to the authority of the Secretary 
under section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act apply equally to the 
Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act (``section 311'') added Section 
5318A to the BSA, granting the Secretary the authority, upon finding 
that reasonable grounds exist for concluding that a foreign 
jurisdiction, foreign financial institution, class of international 
transactions, or type of account is of ``primary money laundering 
concern,'' to require domestic financial institutions and domestic 
financial agencies to take certain ``special measures'' against the 
primary money laundering concern.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Available special measures include requiring: (1) 
Recordkeeping and reporting of certain financial transactions; (2) 
collection of information relating to beneficial ownership; (3) 
collection of information relating to certain payable-through 
accounts; (4) collection of information relating to certain 
correspondent accounts; and (5) prohibition or conditions on the 
opening or maintaining of correspondent or payable-through accounts. 
31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(1)-(5). For a complete discussion of the range of 
possible countermeasures, see 68 FR 18917 (April 17, 2003) 
(proposing to impose special measures against Nauru).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Taken as a whole, Section 5318A provides the Secretary with a range 
of options that can be adapted to target specific money laundering and 
terrorist financing concerns most effectively. These options provide 
the authority to bring additional and useful pressure on those 
jurisdictions and institutions that pose money-laundering threats and 
the ability to take steps to protect the U.S. financial system. Through 
the imposition of various special measures, FinCEN can: gain more 
information about the concerned jurisdictions, financial institutions, 
transactions, and accounts; monitor more effectively the respective 
jurisdictions, financial institutions, transactions, and accounts; and, 
ultimately, protect U.S. financial institutions from involvement with 
jurisdictions, financial institutions, transactions, or accounts that 
pose a money laundering concern.

B. VEF Banka

    At the time of issuance of the final rule on July 13, 2006, VEF 
Banka was headquartered in Riga, Latvia. VEF Banka was one of the 
smallest of Latvia's 23 banks, and, in 2004, was reported to have 
approximately $80 million in assets and 87 employees. Total assets for 
the bank, as of June 30, 2005, were 27.3 million LATS, equivalent to 
approximately $47.4 million. VEF Banka had one subsidiary, Veiksmes 
l[imacr]zings, which offered financial leasing and factoring services. 
In addition to its headquarters in Riga, VEF Banka had one branch in 
Riga and one representative office in the Czech Republic. VEF Banka 
offered corporate and private banking services, issued credit cards for 
non-Latvians, and provided currency exchange through Internet banking 
services (i.e., virtual currencies). In addition, according to its 
financial statements, VEF Banka maintained correspondent accounts in 
countries worldwide, but reported none in the United States at the time 
of the final rule.

II. The Finding, Final Rule, and Subsequent Developments

A. The Finding and Final Rule

    Based upon review and analysis of relevant information, 
consultations with relevant Federal agencies and departments, and after 
consideration of the factors enumerated in section 311, the Secretary, 
through his delegate, the Director of FinCEN, found that reasonable 
grounds existed for concluding that VEF Banka was a financial 
institution of primary money laundering concern. This finding was 
published on April 26, 2005,\4\ in a notice of proposed rulemaking 
which proposed prohibiting covered financial institutions from, 
directly or indirectly, opening or maintaining correspondent accounts 
in the United States for VEF Banka or any of its branches, offices, or 
subsidiaries, pursuant to the authority under 31 U.S.C. 5318A. The 
notice of proposed rulemaking outlined the various factors supporting 
the finding and proposed prohibition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 70 FR 21369 (April 26, 2005, RIN 1506-AA82).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After consulting with required Federal agencies and parties, 
reviewing public comments received from the April 26, 2005 notice of 
proposed rulemaking, and considering additional relevant factors, 
FinCEN issued a final rule on July 13, 2006 that imposed the special 
measure authorized under 31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(5) against VEF Banka.\5\ 
This final rule requires covered financial institutions to terminate 
any correspondent or payable-through

[[Page 45690]]

accounts for, or on behalf of, VEF Banka, and to apply due diligence 
reasonably designed to guard against indirect use of their 
correspondent or payable-through accounts by VEF Banka.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 71 FR 39554 (July 13, 2006, RIN 1506-AA82).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. VEF Banka's Subsequent Developments

    On May 26, 2010, VEF Banka's Latvian banking regulator, the 
Financial and Capital Market Commission (the ``FCMC''), revoked VEF 
Banka's operating license on the grounds that the shareholders of the 
bank had not received authorization from the FCMC for the acquisition 
of qualifying holdings and the bank failed to ensure compliance with 
provisions of the Credit Institution Law.\6\ As a result, the 
shareholders had no decision-making rights and were unable to ``ensure 
prudent bank operations.'' The FCMC's decision to revoke VEF Banka's 
license was confirmed by the Senate of Latvia's Supreme Court on July 
22, 2010 and terminated VEF Banka's ability to operate as a financial 
institution under Latvian law.\7\ On November 15, 2010, the Riga 
District Court issued a non-appealable order to begin liquidating the 
bank.\8\ The liquidation process is expected to be complete in one to 
two years and will result in the disposition of all of VEF Banka's 
assets, including its subsidiary, Veiksmes l[imacr]zings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ``On Withdrawal of the JSC `VEF Banka's' Operating 
Licence,'' Financial Capital Market Commission press release, May 
26, 2010 (http://www.fktk.lv/en/publications/press_releases/2010-05-29_on_withdrawal_of_the_jsc/)
    \7\ ``VEF Bank Loses License,'' The Baltic Times, July 28, 2010 
(http://www.baltictimes.com/news/articles/26661/).
    \8\ ``Court Rule for Liquidation of VEF Banka,'' The Baltic 
Course, November 16, 2010 (http://www.baltic-course.com/eng/
finances/?doc=33962&underline=vef+banka).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Withdrawal of the Finding of Primary Money Laundering Concern 
Against VEF Banka and Repeal of the Final Rule

    For the reasons set forth above, FinCEN hereby withdraws the 
finding of primary money laundering concern against VEF Banka, as 
published in the Federal Register on April 26, 2005 (70 FR 21369) and 
finalized on July 13, 2006 (71 FR 39554), as of August 1, 2011. As a 
result, FinCEN is also repealing the final rule, as published in the 
Federal Register on July 13, 2006 (71 FR 39554) as 31 CFR 103.192 (now 
31 CFR 1010.654), that was based upon the finding. FinCEN's withdrawal 
of the finding of primary money laundering concern against VEF Banka 
and the repeal of the related final rule do not acknowledge any 
remedial measure taken by VEF Banka, but are the result of the 
revocation of VEF Banka's Latvian banking license and the non-
appealable decision by the Riga District Court to liquidate the 
bank.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The ``Republic of Latvia'' was described at length in the 
April 26, 2005 notice of proposed rulemaking, 70 FR 21369, and July 
13, 2006 final rule, 71 FR 39554. Today's repeal of the final rule 
and withdrawal of the finding of primary money laundering concern 
against VEF Banka do not provide updates on jurisdictional 
developments. Further discussion of jurisdictional developments can 
be found at the U.S. Department of State's ``2011 International 
Narcotics Control Strategy Report'' (http://www.state.gov/p/inl/rls/nrcrpt/2011/vol2/156375.htm#latvia).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Regulatory Matters

A. Executive Order 12866

    It has been determined that this rulemaking is not a significant 
regulatory action for purposes of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, a 
regulatory impact analysis is not required.

B. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``Unfunded 
Mandates Act''), Public Law 104-4 (March 22, 1995), requires that an 
agency prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule 
that may result in expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, 
in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in 
any one year. If a budgetary impact statement is required, section 202 
of the Unfunded Mandates Act also requires an agency to identify and 
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives before 
promulgating a rule. FinCEN has determined that it is not required to 
prepare a written statement under Section 202 and has concluded that on 
balance the rule provides the most cost-effective and least burdensome 
alternative to achieve the objectives of the rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.), FinCEN certifies that this final regulation likely will not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The regulatory changes in this final rule merely remove the 
current obligations for financial institutions under 31 CFR 103.192 
(now 31 CFR 1010.654).

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This regulation discontinues the Office of Management and Budget 
Control Number 1506-0041 assigned to the final rule and, as a result, 
reduces the estimated average burden of one hour per affected financial 
institution, totaling 5,000 hours. This regulation contains no new 
information collection requirements subject to review and approval by 
the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d) et seq.).

List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 1010

    Administrative practice and procedure, Banks, banking, Brokers, 
Currency, Foreign banking, Foreign currencies, Gambling, 
Investigations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Securities, Terrorism.

Authority and Issuance

    For the reasons set forth above, 31 CFR part 1010 is amended as 
follows:

PART 1010--GENERAL PROVISIONS

0
1. The authority citation for 31 CFR part 1010 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority:  12 U.S.C. 1829b and 1951-1959; 31 U.S.C. 5311-5314 
and 5316-5332; title III, sec. 314, Pub. L. 107-56, 115 Stat. 307.


Sec.  1010.654  [Removed]

0
2. Part 1010 is amended by removing Sec.  1010.654.

    Dated: July 22, 2011.
James H. Freis, Jr.,
Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
[FR Doc. 2011-19118 Filed 7-29-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-02-P