We have a process issue but I need a second set of eyes on this fact pattern and have some questions.

Amount $12k
11/30 - Fraud activity deemed suspicious
12/20 - Case Closed - Only a name available, no other identifying information, SAR not filed.
1/13 - Another investigator came across the case and found an address and we believe a SAR should have been filed and will file today.

What are the obligations if a SAR is filed late? We are conducted remedial training with the initial investigator to train them where to find the address that wasn't found during initial investigation. QC will also be included because they should have spotted it.

Is there any argument here that we didn't file late?
What do you deem your threshold for having enough information to file on a suspect?
Can we argue we didn't have the facts available until we found it?

Ultimately a training issue that is being addressed, but is there anything else as the BSAO that I need to do to cover myself and the institution?

You had a name? What does an address have to do with anything?

Violations aggregating $5,000 or more where a suspect can be identified. Whenever the bank detects any known or suspected Federal criminal violation, or pattern of criminal violations, committed or attempted against the bank or involving a transaction or transactions conducted through the bank and involving or aggregating $5,000 or more in funds or other assets, where the bank believes that it was either an actual or potential victim of a criminal violation, or series of criminal violations, or that the bank was used to facilitate a criminal transaction, and the bank has a substantial basis for identifying a possible suspect or group of suspects. If it is determined prior to filing this report that the identified suspect or group of suspects has used an “alias,” then information regarding the true identity of the suspect or group of suspects, as well as alias identifiers, such as drivers’ licenses or social security numbers, addresses and telephone numbers, must be reported.

So what you're saying is, name alone should have constituted the filing.

Here's the issue that I need to address then. Our fraud team doesn't report to BSA, it reports to our security team. As such, BSA has little oversight of their process other than QC'ing actual SARs as we file their SARs for them. A much bigger issue that needs to be addressed I imagine.

What constitutes "substantial basis for identifying a possible suspect or group of suspects" when there are no other identifies. What if the suspect used Donald Duck as an alias with no other identifying information?

You have a name - you are required to file. The following is then additional information that is required.

" If it is determined prior to filing this report that the identified suspect or group of suspects has used an “alias,” then information regarding the true identity of the suspect or group of suspects, as well as alias identifiers, such as drivers’ licenses or social security numbers, addresses and telephone numbers, must be reported."

Substantial basis for identification is where I am hooked up here. Mickey Mouse or John Smith doesn't, to me, constitution a substantial basis alone. Is there an official interpretation somewhere on substantial basis?

You won't find "official interpretation." If you want to email your question to the FinCEN help desk for something "official" feel free.
Randy's point (of which I am in agreement) is that if you have a name, you file at the $5,000 threshold. While you may not have any other identifying information, another institution filing on the same suspicious activity may have gathered more information on the same suspect, regardless of the alias they are using, and your SAR could help law enofrcement identify additional victims, suspects, or add additional counts to an indictment.

Quick question, assuming I instruct the fraud team to do a lookback as a result, who am I contacting about a potential lookback regulator wise? I know there is a CTR determination email, would I use the same email or just contact my primary regulator for instruction?

There is no seperate instructions for a SAR lookback.

Since the CTR lookback instructions include sending a letter to your primary reglulator, the best approach would be to mirror that process for SAR (which is a much better approach than doing nothing and ending up with a mandated lookback order in your exam report.)