We've been notified that final regulations for the customer identification program requirement of USAPA section 326 probably won't be out before Oct 25. But you knew that!

We've also been advised that until a final regulation is out, banks won't be required to comply with 326. And if you were worried about us coming to examine you for compliance with 326 on Oct 26, rest easy. We wouldn't have done that anyway...it's a Saturday! Seriously, we planned on taking a common sense approach to the implementation anyway given the timing. There is now some discussion of putting a reasonable implementation period in the final regulation. Sounds like your voices were heard.

Sorry to begin another string on this topic but I thought this shouldn't be buried at the end of one of the previous strings. AR.

This is Dolly. For some reason I am uable to log in. Anyway, thank you Anon for the information. I am happy to hear that your agency is going to be reasonable -- I hope all will.

I think we are all hoping for a delay in the implementation. Let us know if you hear anything more!

Dolly Nugent
VP/Compliance Officer
Citizens Business Bank

Thanks Anon! Our customer identification standards are already pretty much in line with the proposal. The big sticking point for us is the photo copying of Driver's Licenses and how/where to store them.

My personal beef is with the non-standard issuance and format of the "lists" that we are supposed to check. I am hoping that Treasury can set some standards.

I just had a great idea for a scary Halloween costume - but how would one dress as a regulatory proposal?

Well.....having a picture like that reminds me of the sheep in wolf's clothing (or gee...was it the other way around)??!! You wouldn't just be pullin' the wool (hide?) over our eyes, now would you, and showing up on our door on a Saturday?!

Happy days are here again!

The delay is good news!

So is everyone going to wait or are you going to temporary implement these procedures using the proposed regulations. My board meets next Tuesday and I'm still wondering whether to put the policy through or not.

For those of you who don't subscribe to the Compliance Briefing emails, we put out an article on the CIP Program Implementation Deadline that you can link to here:

CIP Program Implementation Deadline

I'm asking my board to approve a high-level policy that should be OK regardless of the final regulation's wording; we delayed working on final procedures, however, until we see the final opus.

Although we are going to wait for publication of the final rule before presenting our program to our boards, I think John has a good idea.

My board meets next Tuesday also. I am going to give a brief summary of the requirements, the status of the (absence of a) final reg, and let them know that I will be back with a program to approve when the reg is finalized. This will at least show in the minutes if the examiners look back to check.

I have already given the Board a "heads up" on coming requirements of the CIP. I don't plan to take anything in the form of a policy to them until later.

You are an angel! Our Board package is complete and I'm going before the board this coming Tuesday. We've already incorporated the new CIP into the BSA Policy. So! We'll submit it advising them of the extension. Not knowing for sure what time frame we're dealing with we'll probably submit it again in January with additional revision; which is the scheduled anniversary date for BSA policy review anyway.

Thank you again Anon. Regulator

I have a generic policy going to my Board next Wednesday. I will explain the situation to them and advise them that we will develop defined procedures once the final rule comes out.

I received the following from the OCC today (excerpt from the OCC email to their examiners):

"In the last few weeks, we have been receiving questions from the industry concerning whether banks will be expected to have customer identification programs in place by October 25. Today, OCC staff was informally advised by Treasury staff that banks will not be required to comply with the customer identification provisions of section 326 until a final rule is issued and effective. We are also discussing including a provision in the final rule that would allow a reasonable time for implementation.

We expect to receive official confirmation from Treasury soon. In the meantime, if you receive inquiries from the banks we supervise, please advise them that the section 326 rule is not final or effective, they are not required to comply by October 25, and the OCC will not be examining for
section 326 compliance on that date."

I am temporarily putting my in place. And Anon. Thanks for the good news.

I have just presented a policy to the Board for approval at the meeting next week. But we will hold off with implementation of scanning the IDs until we get the final rules. If the rules change, it will only mean minor editing to the policy.

Oh, I feel sooooo much better!

We had our's ready to go to next Tuesday's board meeting, now I've decided to pull it and wait for more details. I wouldn't want to have our policy approved, and not be ready to abide by our policy with the new ID issues - not to mention how this would affect the lending side of the bank. I am however going to update the board on the recent developments and what we've done to date in preparation of the new requirements.

That is the best news I've heard all week!!!!!

Coordination with all departments involved had pretty much gotten me to the point of breakdown. I think this is the best news I have heard all year. I know it is just a postponement, but knowing implementation will not be required until a "reasonable" period after the final regs are published is a huge relief.

Compliance professionals rejoice!

It's not often that you hear a banker call a regulator an angel.

Especially THIS regulator!

Bonnie,

I just attended a BSA/Anti-Money Laudering seminar and we discussed CIP. If you read the "regulation" it does not say that you must copy any documentation that you use to identify the customer. It says that you must record the documentation used ... so you could record on the signature card that you used a state drivers license #1234456, with an expiration date of 12/10/04. Question is how practical will it be to record the information instead of copying it. Stay tuned for the next installment of "As The CIP Changes"

The confusion comes from the proposal, FedReg page 48294 where it states, "Where a bank relies upon a document to verify identity, the bank must maintain a copy of the document that the bank relied on that clearly evidences the type of document and any identifying information it may contain."

I have to go with Andy here. IF you rely on a document for verification the proposed rule requires that you keep a copy. If you use nondocumentary verification then you may not have any documents to copy, but you would still have to "record the methods and result of any additional measures undertaken to verify the identity of the customer" as well as "the resolution of any discrepancy in the identifying information obtained."