Conditional Exception to Bank Secrecy Act Regulations Relating to the Burma Section 311 Final Rule

71986 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1Treasury Order 180–01 (Sept. 26, 2002). updated guidance on the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 device, urging passengers aboard an aircraft to power down and not use, charge, or stow in checked baggage, any Samsung Galaxy Note 7 device. Notwithstanding the above DOT actions, and in light of continued risks identified by Samsung and CPSC associated with Samsung Galaxy Note 7 devices, the further action described in this Order is necessary to eliminate unsafe conditions that create an imminent hazard to public health and safety and the environment. Remedial Action To eliminate or abate the imminent hazard: (1) Persons covered by this Order shall not transport, nor offer for transportation, via air any Samsung Galaxy Note 7 device. (2) Air carriers are required to alert passengers to the prohibition against air transport of Samsung Galaxy Note 7 devices, in particular, immediately prior to boarding and to deny boarding to a passenger in possession of a Samsung Galaxy Note 7 device unless and until the passenger divests themselves and carry-on or checked baggage of the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 device. (3) Persons covered by this Order who inadvertently bring a prohibited Samsung Galaxy Note 7 device aboard an aircraft must immediately power off the device, leave it powered off until no longer aboard the aircraft, not use or charge the device while aboard the aircraft, protect the device from accidental activation, including disabling any features that may turn on the device, such as alarm clocks, and keep the device on their person and not in the overhead compartment, seat back pocket, nor in any carry-on baggage, for the duration of the flight. (4) When a flight crew member identifies that a passenger is in possession of a Samsung Galaxy Note 7 device while the aircraft is in flight, the crew member must instruct the passenger to power off the device, not use or charge the device while aboard the aircraft, protect the device from accidental activation, including disabling any features that may turn on the device, such as alarm clocks, and keep the device on their person and not in the overhead compartment, seat back pocket, nor in any carry-on baggage, for the duration of the flight. Rescission of This Order This Order remains in effect until the Secretary determines that an imminent hazard no longer exists or a change in applicable statute or federal regulation occurs that supersedes the requirements of this Order, in which case the Secretary will issue a Rescission Order. Failure To Comply Any person failing to comply with this Order is subject to civil penalties of up to $179,933 for each violation for each day they are found to be in violation (49 U.S.C. 5123). A person violating this Order may also be subject to criminal prosecution, which may result in fines under title 18, imprisonment of up to ten years, or both (49 U.S.C. 5124). Right To Review Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5121(d)(3) and in accordance with section 554 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 500 et seq, a review of this action may be filed. Any petition seeking relief must be filed within 20 calendar days of the date of this order (49 U.S.C. 5121(d)(3)), and addressed to U.S. DOT Dockets, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12–140, Washington, DC 20590 (http:// Regulations.gov). Furthermore, a petition for review must state the material facts at issue which the petitioner believes dispute the existence of an imminent hazard and must include all evidence and exhibits to be considered. The petition must also state the relief sought. Within 30 days from the date the petition for review is filed, the Secretary must approve or deny the relief in writing; or find that the imminent hazard continues to exist, and extend the original Emergency Order. In response to a petition for review, the Secretary may grant the requested relief in whole or in part; or may order other relief as justice may require (including the immediate assignment the case to the Office of Hearings for a formal hearing on the record). Emergency Contact Official If you have any questions concerning this Emergency Restriction/Prohibition Order, you should call PHMSA Hazardous Materials Information Center at 1–800–467–4922 or email at phmsa.hm-infocenter@dot.gov. Issued in Washington, DC, on October 14, 2016. Patricia A. McNall, Deputy Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration. [FR Doc. 2016–25322 Filed 10–14–16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Financial Crimes Enforcement Network 31 CFR Part 1010 Conditional Exception to Bank Secrecy Act Regulations Relating to the Burma Section 311 Final Rule AGENCY: Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (‘‘FinCEN’’), Treasury. ACTION: Grant of conditional exception. SUMMARY: This document contains a conditional exception, pursuant to authority under the Bank Secrecy Act, which would permit certain U.S. financial institutions to maintain correspondent accounts for Burmese banks under certain conditions. DATES: Applicability Date: This conditional exception is applicable beginning October 7, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: All questions about the exceptive relief must be addressed to the FinCEN Resource Center at (800) 767–2825 (Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m.–6:00 p.m. ET). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Statutory and Regulatory Background The Bank Secrecy Act (‘‘BSA’’), Titles I and II of Public Law 91–508, as amended, codified at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12 U.S.C. 1951–1959, and 31 U.S.C. 5311–5314 and 5316–5332, authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury (‘‘Secretary’’), among other things, to issue regulations requiring persons to keep records and file reports that are determined to have a high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax, regulatory, and counter-terrorism matters. The regulations implementing the BSA appear at 31 CFR Chapter X. The Secretary’s authority to administer the BSA has been delegated to the Director of FinCEN.1 FinCEN has the authority, under 31 U.S.C. 5318(a)(7) and 31 CFR 1010.970, to make exceptions to the requirements of 31 CFR Chapter X. Such exceptions may be conditional or unconditional, may apply to particular persons or to classes of persons, and may apply to particular transactions or classes of transactions. Moreover, an exception is issuable or revocable in the sole discretion of FinCEN, based on the circumstances to which the exception applies. II. FinCEN Issuance 2016–1 This document, FinCEN Issuance 2016–1, provides exceptive relief under VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:39 Oct 18, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM 19OCR1 jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 71987 2 68 FR 66299 (Nov. 25, 2003). 3 69 FR 19093 (Apr. 12, 2004) (codified at 31 CFR 1010.651). 4 68 FR at 66300. 5The FATF is an inter-governmental body that sets standards and promotes effective implementation of legal, regulatory, and operational measures for combating money laundering, terrorist financing, and other related threats to the integrity of the international financial system. 6 68 FR at 66302. 7United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, Myanmar becomes the 165th State Party to UN Convention on Corruption, January 10, 2013. 8 68 FR at 66300–301. 9 Id. at 66301. 31 U.S.C. 5318(a)(7) and 31 CFR 1010.970 to U.S. financial institutions covered by 31 CFR 1010.651 (FinCEN’s rule imposing special measures against Burma under Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act). The exceptive relief permits such financial institutions to maintain correspondent accounts for Burmese banks under certain conditions. Specifically, FinCEN is providing the following exceptive relief: The provisions of paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of 31 CFR 1010.651 shall not apply to a correspondent account that is established, maintained, administered, or managed in the United States by a covered financial institution (as defined in 31 CFR 1010.651(a)(3)) for, or on behalf of, a Burmese banking institution, provided that such covered financial institution subjects the account to the due diligence obligations set forth under Section 312 of the USA PATRIOT Act and its implementing regulation 31 CFR 1010.610. FinCEN is providing this exceptive relief given (i) FinCEN’s assessment of Burma’s progress to date in addressing issues identified in FinCEN’s 2003 finding that Burma was a jurisdiction of primary money laundering concern; (ii) a high-level commitment by Burma to continue making progress in addressing those issues; and (iii) FinCEN’s consideration of the ongoing effect on U.S. national security and foreign policy of U.S. financial institutions’ compliance with 31 CFR 1010.651. Section 311 Action Against Burma On November 18, 2003, FinCEN found Burma to be a jurisdiction of primary money laundering concern pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 5318A, as added by Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 (Section 311).2 FinCEN based its finding on a number of factors, including (i) Burma’s lack of an effective anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) regime; (ii) high levels of public corruption in Burma; (iii) a recognition that Burma is a haven for international drug trafficking; and (iv) a lack of cooperation by Burma with U.S. law enforcement agencies in criminal matters. In connection with this finding, on April 12, 2004, FinCEN issued a final rule at 31 CFR 1010.651 prohibiting U.S. financial institutions from maintaining U.S. correspondent accounts for Burmese banking institutions.3 Burma’s Progress in Addressing the Concerns Described in the Section 311 Finding Since FinCEN promulgated the final rule in 2004, Burma has taken steps to improve its AML/CFT regime and to address the issues of corruption, drug trafficking, and law enforcement cooperation. Improvements to Burma’s AML/CFT Regime FinCEN’s finding noted that ‘‘the Burmese anti-money laundering law is ineffective and unenforceable’’ and could not be regarded as effectively remedying a number of AML/CFT deficiencies, including that: (i) The Burmese Central Bank had no anti￾money laundering regulations for financial institutions; (ii) banks licensed by Burma were not legally required to obtain or maintain identification information about their customers; (iii) such banks were also not required to maintain transaction records of customer accounts; and (iv) Burmese financial institutions were not required to report suspicious transactions.4 Since 2012, Burma has made significant progress in addressing the strategic AML/CFT deficiencies identified by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF),5 which resulted in its removal in June 2016 from the FATF’s public list of countries with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies. In 2013, the Burmese Central Bank, which previously had been part of the Ministry of Finance, became independent. Through its 2014 Money Laundering Law and the Burmese Central Bank’s 2015 customer due diligence directive, Burma now requires financial institutions to conduct due diligence and know the true identity of their customers including beneficial owners. Burma has criminalized money laundering and terrorist financing, and it has established a legal framework to implement targeted financial sanctions under United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR) 1267, 1373, and related resolutions. Further, Burma has established a financial intelligence unit and made progress in ensuring that it has operational and budgetary independence. Actions Addressing Public Corruption in Burma FinCEN’s finding noted that, as of 2003, Transparency International—the leading international non-governmental organization devoted to curbing corruption—ranked Burma as ‘‘the fourth most corrupt jurisdiction out of 133 jurisdictions assessed worldwide.’’ 6 Burma has taken some significant steps to address public corruption. In 2012, Burma ratified the UN Convention against Corruption.7 Burma passed an Anti-Corruption Law in 2013 (and amended it in 2016), improving its ability to receive and investigate allegations of official corruption. Attention to International Drug Trafficking FinCEN’s 2003 finding identified Burma as ‘‘a haven for international drug trafficking’’ and noted that Burma had failed to take any regulatory or enforcement action against financial institutions with well-known criminal links.8 Burma is in the process of restructuring and expanding its counternarcotic task forces and Burma has worked regionally on counternarcotics initiatives, including those coordinated through the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. Cooperation With U.S. Law Enforcement Agencies in Criminal Matters FinCEN noted in its 2003 finding that U.S. law enforcement indicated that they rarely gained access to bank-related information pursuant to investigations, and that they received no cooperation regarding counterfeiting investigations involving Burma.9 U.S. law enforcement indicates that cooperation with Burmese authorities has since improved. For example, in September 2014, the U.S. and Burmese governments signed a Letter of Agreement to enhance cooperation in the fight against illicit drugs and transnational crime, and to support the development of Burma’s law enforcement capacity and promote the rule of law. FinCEN’s Remaining Concerns FinCEN is encouraged by Burma’s progress thus far, but believes that Burma has not yet fully addressed the concerns articulated in the 2003 finding. Although Burma has made a number of technical improvements to its AML/ VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:39 Oct 18, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM 19OCR1 jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES

71988 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 10U.S. State Department, 2016 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, available at http://www.state.gov/j/inl/rls/nrcrpt/2016/vol2/ 253387.htm. 11See Section 706(1) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003 (Pub. L. 107– 228); 2016 Presidential Determination for Major Drug Producing and Transit Countries, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/ 09/12/presidential-determination-major-drug￾transit-or-major-illicit-drug. 12 69 FR at 19094. CFT regime, FinCEN remains concerned that Burma has not yet implemented its new reforms and has not displayed adequate effectiveness in mitigating the risks and threats of money laundering and terrorist financing. FinCEN also notes that a significant portion of financial activity in Burma relies upon informal money transfer systems, which remain largely unregulated and unsupervised. FinCEN is also concerned that Burma has not sufficiently addressed the corruption issues identified in the 2003 finding. Burma’s ranking on Transparency International’s International Corruption Perceptions Index remains high. The U.S. State Department’s 2016 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report on Burma notes that ‘‘corruption is endemic in both business and government. . . The rule of law remains weak, and Burma continues to face a significant risk of narcotics proceeds being laundered through commercial ventures.’’ 10 The United States also continues to recognize Burma as a haven for international drug trafficking. In September 2016, under the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, the President determined Burma to be a major illicit drug producing country or major drug-transit country.11 Further, Burma’s cooperation with U.S. law enforcement, while improved since 2003, nonetheless remains nascent and largely untested. Considerations for Exceptive Relief As noted in the final rule, the Section 311 action was designed to encourage Burma to make necessary changes to its AML/CFT regime in order to address FinCEN’s concerns. Burma has begun to address those concerns, but significant work remains. FinCEN welcomes Burma’s recent commitment to work with FinCEN and other components of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, as well as with the U.S. government more broadly, in advancing its AML/CFT efforts. FinCEN has considered Burma’s progress, its remaining deficiencies, and its commitment to address those deficiencies in deciding to issue this exceptive relief. This exceptive relief also takes into account the effect of FinCEN’s action on U.S. national security and foreign policy, as did the final rule.12 FinCEN’s final rule contained an exemption at 31 CFR 1010.651(b)(3) that allowed U.S. financial institutions to maintain correspondent accounts for Burmese banks if such activity was licensed under authorities administered by the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). Since 2012, OFAC has, via general licenses, authorized a broad range of financial activity with respect to Burma that would otherwise have been prohibited under the Section 311 rule. On October 7, 2016, the President terminated the national emergency with respect to Burma and revoked all Burma sanctions Executive orders, lifting the economic and financial sanctions on Burma administered by OFAC. As a result of the termination of the Burma sanctions program, the OFAC general licenses referenced above are no longer in effect. Therefore, the exemption incorporated into FinCEN’s final rule at 31 CFR 1010.651(b)(3), which effectively permitted U.S. correspondent account activity with Burmese banks, no longer has any operational effect. FinCEN has taken this into consideration in deciding to issue this exceptive relief. Dated: October 13, 2016. Jamal El Hindi, Acting Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. [FR Doc. 2016–25249 Filed 10–18–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810–02–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R08–OAR–2016–0311; FRL–9954–14– Region 8] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Utah; Revisions to the Utah Division of Administrative Rules, R307–300 Series; Area Source Rules for Attainment of Fine Particulate Matter Standards AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing approval and finalizing the conditional approval of portions of the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) State Implementation Plan (SIP) and other general rule revisions submitted by the State of Utah. The revisions affect the Utah Division of Administrative Rules (DAR), R307–300 Series; Requirements for Specific Locations. The revisions had submission dates of May 9, 2013, May 20, 2014, September 8, 2015, and March 8, 2016. The March 8, 2016 submittal contains rule revisions to address our February 25, 2016 conditional approval of several Utah DAR R307–300 Series rules submitted on February 2, 2012, May 9, 2013, and May 20, 2014. These area source rules control emissions of direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors, which are sulfur dioxides (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC). Additionally, the EPA is finalizing to approve the State’s reasonably available control measure (RACM) determinations for the rule revisions that pertain to the PM2.5 SIP. This action is being taken under section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). DATES: This final rule is effective on November 18, 2016. ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2016–0311. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through http:// www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Crystal Ostigaard, Air Program, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, (303) 312–6602, ostigaard.crystal@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), the EPA strengthened the level of the 24-hour PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), lowering the primary and secondary standards from 65 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), the 1997 standard, to 35 mg/m3. On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), the EPA designated three nonattainment areas in Utah for the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 mg/m3. These are the Salt Lake City, Utah; Provo, Utah; and VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:39 Oct 18, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM 19OCR1 jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES