13258 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

193 In conducting this verification, operators are 

required to use the same methods that they must 

use to obtain verifiable parental consent. 16 CFR 

312.6(a)(3)(i). 

194 64 FR at 59904. 

195 Id. at 59904–05. 

196 16 CFR 312.6(a)(1) and (2). 

197CUNA 2 at 2. 

198 DMA 2 at 5; ESRB at 3–4; Mattel 2 at 5–6; 

TRUSTe at 1–3. 199 DMA 2 at 5. 200Mattel 2 at 5–6. 201TRUSTe at 3. 202 16 CFR 312.10(a) and 312.10(b)(4). 

before deleting the information.193 In 

drafting the Rule, the Commission 

carefully considered what level of 

identification would be appropriate for 

these two requirements. Erroneously 

disclosing a child’s actual personal 

information to a purported parent poses 

a high risk to that child’s privacy 

because the purported parent receives 

the actual personal information of the 

child.194 In contrast, erroneously 

deleting a child’s actual personal 

information poses a lower risk because 

the purported parent never receives the 

information.195 The Commission thus 

concluded that the former, but not the 

latter, situation warrants verifying the 

purported parent’s identity.196 After 

reconsideration, the Commission 

concludes that no modification to this 

requirement is warranted. 

5. Section 312.7: Prohibition Against 

Conditioning a Child’s Participation on 

the Collection of More Personal 

Information Than Is Necessary 

Section 312.7 of the Rule prohibits 

operators from conditioning a child’s 

participation in an activity on disclosing 

more personal information than is 

reasonably necessary to participate in 

that activity. The Commission asked 

whether this prohibition is effective, if 

its benefits outweigh its costs, and what 

changes, if any, should be made to it. 

The Commission received one comment 

addressing this provision of the Rule. 

The commenter raised no concerns and 

cited this provision as one way in which 

the Rule has ‘‘succeeded in providing 

more privacy protections and safeguards 

for both children and their parents.’’ 197

The Commission concludes that no 

changes to this provision are warranted. 

6. Section 312.8: Confidentiality, 

Security, and Integrity of Personal 

Information Collected From a Child 

Section 312.8 of the Rule requires 

operators to establish and maintain 

reasonable procedures to protect the 

confidentiality, security, and integrity of 

personal information collected from a 

child. The Commission asked whether 

this requirement is effective, if its 

benefits outweigh its costs, and what 

changes, if any, should be made to it. 

The FTC also specifically asked if the 

term ‘‘reasonable procedure’’ is 

sufficiently clear. The Commission 

received no comments addressing this 

provision of the Rule. The FTC 

concludes that no modifications to this 

requirement are necessary. 

7. Section 312.10: Safe Harbors 

Section 312.10 of the Rule provides 

that an operator will be deemed in 

compliance if the operator complies 

with Commission-approved selfregulatory guidelines. The Commission 

asked if this ‘‘safe harbor’’ approach is 

effective, if its benefits outweigh its 

costs, and what changes, if any, should 

be made to it. In addressing the Rule’s 

safe harbor provision, commenters 

uniformly lauded the part played by 

COPPA safe harbors in making 

successful the Commission’s effort to 

protect children’s online safety and 

privacy.198 In addition, one commenter 

stated that the COPPA safe harbors ‘‘are 

an important educational resource on 

children’s privacy issues, and serve to 

heighten awareness of children’s 

privacy issues more generally.’’ 199

Another commenter said, ‘‘the Safe 

Harbor program demonstrates the 

benefits of a self-regulatory scheme and 

mechanism for industry to maintain 

high standards with limited government 

intervention.’’ 200

One commenter, a COPPA safe 

harbor, suggested that the Commission 

encourage greater participation in 

COPPA safe harbor programs by 

amending the Rule to provide that 

‘‘membership in good standing in a 

Commission-approved safe harbor 

program is an affirmative defense to an 

enforcement action’’ under COPPA.201

As this commenter recognized, the Rule 

already provides that operators ‘‘in 

compliance’’ with an approved safe 

harbor program ‘‘will be deemed to be 

in compliance’’ with the Rule and the 

Commission will consider an operator’s 

participation in a safe harbor program in 

determining whether to open an 

investigation or file an enforcement 

action, and what remedies to seek.202

The commenter did not provide any 

evidence demonstrating that these 

current incentives to participate in safe 

harbor programs are inadequate. The 

Commission thus concludes that no 

changes to the safe harbor provision are 

necessary. 

IV. Conclusion 

For the foregoing reasons, the 

Commission has determined to retain 

the Children’s Online Privacy Protection 

Rule without modification. 

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 312 

Communications, Computer 

technology, Consumer protection, 

Infants and Children, Privacy, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Safety, 

Science and technology, Trade 

practices, Youth. 

By direction of the Commission. 

Donald S. Clark, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 06–2356 Filed 3–14–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY 

CORPORATION 

29 CFR Parts 4022 and 4044 

Benefits Payable in Terminated SingleEmployer Plans; Allocation of Assets 

in Single-Employer Plans; Interest 

Assumptions for Valuing and Paying 

Benefits 

AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty 

Corporation. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Pension Benefit Guaranty 

Corporation’s regulations on Benefits 

Payable in Terminated Single-Employer 

Plans and Allocation of Assets in 

Single-Employer Plans prescribe interest 

assumptions for valuing and paying 

benefits under terminating singleemployer plans. This final rule amends 

the regulations to adopt interest 

assumptions for plans with valuation 

dates in April 2006. Interest 

assumptions are also published on the 

PBGC’s Web site (http://www.pbgc.gov). 

DATES: Effective April 1, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Catherine B. Klion, Attorney, Legislative 

and Regulatory Department, Pension 

Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K 

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005, 

202–326–4024. (TTY/TDD users may 

call the Federal relay service toll-free at 

1–800–877–8339 and ask to be 

connected to 202–326–4024.) 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

PBGC’s regulations prescribe actuarial 

assumptions—including interest 

assumptions—for valuing and paying 

plan benefits of terminating singleemployer plans covered by title IV of 

the Employee Retirement Income 

Security Act of 1974. The interest 

assumptions are intended to reflect 

current conditions in the financial and 

annuity markets. 

Three sets of interest assumptions are 

prescribed: (1) A set for the valuation of 

benefits for allocation purposes under 

section 4044 (found in Appendix B to 

Part 4044), (2) a set for the PBGC to use 


cchase on PROD1PC60 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 13259 

to determine whether a benefit is 

payable as a lump sum and to determine 

lump-sum amounts to be paid by the 

PBGC (found in Appendix B to Part 

4022), and (3) a set for private-sector 

pension practitioners to refer to if they 

wish to use lump-sum interest rates 

determined using the PBGC’s historical 

methodology (found in Appendix C to 

Part 4022). 

This amendment (1) adds to 

Appendix B to Part 4044 the interest 

assumptions for valuing benefits for 

allocation purposes in plans with 

valuation dates during April 2006, (2) 

adds to Appendix B to Part 4022 the 

interest assumptions for the PBGC to 

use for its own lump-sum payments in 

plans with valuation dates during April 

2006, and (3) adds to Appendix C to 

Part 4022 the interest assumptions for 

private-sector pension practitioners to 

refer to if they wish to use lump-sum 

interest rates determined using the 

PBGC’s historical methodology for 

valuation dates during April 2006. 

For valuation of benefits for allocation 

purposes, the interest assumptions that 

the PBGC will use (set forth in 

Appendix B to part 4044) will be 5.60 

percent for the first 20 years following 

the valuation date and 4.75 percent 

thereafter. These interest assumptions 

represent a decrease (from those in 

effect for March 2006) of 0.10 percent 

for the first 20 years following the 

valuation date and are otherwise 

unchanged. These interest assumptions 

reflect the PBGC’s recently updated 

mortality assumptions, which are 

effective for terminations on or after 

January 1, 2006. See the PBGC’s final 

rule published December 2, 2005 (70 FR 

72205), which is available at http:// 

www.pbgc.gov/docs/05–23554.pdf. 

Because the updated mortality 

assumptions reflect improvements in 

mortality, these interest assumptions are 

higher than they would have been using 

the old mortality assumptions. 

The interest assumptions that the 

PBGC will use for its own lump-sum 

payments (set forth in Appendix B to 

part 4022) will be 2.75 percent for the 

period during which a benefit is in pay 

status and 4.00 percent during any years 

preceding the benefit’s placement in pay 

status. These interest assumptions 

represent no change from those in effect 

for March 2006. 

For private-sector payments, the 

interest assumptions (set forth in 

Appendix C to part 4022) will be the 

same as those used by the PBGC for 

determining and paying lump sums (set 

forth in Appendix B to part 4022). 

The PBGC has determined that notice 

and public comment on this amendment 

are impracticable and contrary to the 

public interest. This finding is based on 

the need to determine and issue new 

interest assumptions promptly so that 

the assumptions can reflect, as 

accurately as possible, current market 

conditions. 

Because of the need to provide 

immediate guidance for the valuation 

and payment of benefits in plans with 

valuation dates during April 2006, the 

PBGC finds that good cause exists for 

making the assumptions set forth in this 

amendment effective less than 30 days 

after publication. 

The PBGC has determined that this 

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under the criteria set forth in 

Executive Order 12866. 

Because no general notice of proposed 

rulemaking is required for this 

amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C. 

601(2). 

List of Subjects 

29 CFR Part 4022 

Employee benefit plans, Pension 

insurance, Pensions, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

29 CFR Part 4044 

Employee benefit plans, Pension 

insurance, Pensions. 

■ In consideration of the foregoing, 29 

CFR parts 4022 and 4044 are amended 

as follows: 

PART 4022—BENEFITS PAYABLE IN 

TERMINATED SINGLE-EMPLOYER 

PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 4022 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1302, 1322, 1322b, 

1341(c)(3)(D), and 1344. 

■ 2. In appendix B to part 4022, Rate Set 

150, as set forth below, is added to the 

table. 

Appendix B to Part 4022—Lump Sum 

Interest Rates For PBGC Payments 

* * * * * 

Rate set 

For plans with a valuation 

date Immediate 

annuity rate 

(percent) 

Deferred annuities (percent) 

On or after Before i1 i2 i3 n1 n2

* * * * * * * 

150 4–1–06 5–1–06 2.75 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8 

■ 3. In appendix C to part 4022, Rate Set 

150, as set forth below, is added to the 

table. 

Appendix C to Part 4022—Lump Sum 

Interest Rates For Private-Sector 

Payments 

* * * * * 

Rate set 

For plans with a valuation 

date Immediate 

annuitys rate 

(percent) 

Deferred annuities (percent) 

On or after Before i1 i2 i3 n1 n2

* * * * * * * 

150 4–1–06 5–1–06 2.75 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8 


cchase on PROD1PC60 with RULES
13260 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

1The statute generally referred to as the ‘‘Bank 

Secrecy Act,’’ Titles I and II of Public Law 91–508, 

as amended, is codified at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12 

U.S.C. 1951–1959, and 31 U.S.C. 5311–5314, 5316–

5332. In pertinent part, regulations implementing 

Title II of the Bank Secrecy Act appear at 31 CFR 

Part 103. 

2Therefore, references to the authority of the 

Secretary of the Treasury under section 311 of the 

USA PATRIOT Act apply equally to the Director of 

the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. 

3Language expanding the scope of the Bank 

Secrecy Act to intelligence or counter-intelligence 

activities to protect against international terrorism 

was added by section 358 of the Uniting and 

Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate 

Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism 

(‘‘USA PATRIOT’’) Act of 2001, Public Law 107–

56 (October 26, 2001). 

PART 4044—ALLOCATION OF 

ASSETS IN SINGLE-EMPLOYER 

PLANS 

■ 4. The authority citation for part 4044 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1301(a), 1302(b)(3), 

1341, 1344, 1362. 

■ 5. In appendix B to part 4044, a new 

entry for April 2006, as set forth below, 

is added to the table. 

Appendix B to Part 4044—Interest 

Rates Used to Value Benefits 

* * * * * 

For valuation occurring in the month—

The values of it are: 

it for t = it for t = it for t = 

* * * * * * * 

April 2006 .......................................................................... .0560 1–20 .0475 >20 N/A N/A 

Issued in Washington, DC, on this 8th day 

of March 2006. 

Vincent K. Snowbarger, 

Deputy Executive Director, Pension Benefit 

Guaranty Corporation. 

[FR Doc. 06–2458 Filed 3–14–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7709–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

31 CFR Part 103 

RIN 1506–AA64 

Financial Crimes Enforcement 

Network; Amendment to the Bank 

Secrecy Act Regulations—Imposition 

of Special Measure Against 

Commercial Bank of Syria, Including 

Its Subsidiary, Syrian Lebanese 

Commercial Bank, as a Financial 

Institution of Primary Money 

Laundering Concern 

AGENCY: Financial Crimes Enforcement 

Network, Department of the Treasury. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Financial Crimes 

Enforcement Network is issuing a final 

rule imposing a special measure against 

Commercial Bank of Syria as a financial 

institution of primary money laundering 

concern, pursuant to the authority 

contained in 31 U.S.C. 5318A of the 

Bank Secrecy Act. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

April 14, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Regulatory Policy and Programs 

Division, Financial Crimes Enforcement 

Network, (800) 949–2732. 

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 Bank Secrecy Act, 

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 Bank Secrecy Act appear at 31 CFR 

part 103.1 The authority of the Secretary 

of the Treasury (‘‘the Secretary’’) to 

administer the Bank Secrecy Act and its 

implementing regulations has been 

delegated to the Director of the 

Financial Crimes Enforcement 

Network.2 The Act authorizes the 

Director to issue regulations to require 

all financial institutions defined as such 

in the Act to maintain or file certain 

reports or records that have been 

determined to have a high degree of 

usefulness in criminal, tax, or regulatory 

investigations or proceedings, or in the 

conduct of intelligence or counterintelligence activities, including 

analysis, to protect against international 

terrorism, and to implement anti-money 

laundering programs and compliance 

procedures.3

Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act 

added section 5318A to the Bank 

Secrecy Act, granting the Secretary the 

authority, after finding that reasonable 

grounds exist for concluding that a 

foreign jurisdiction, institution, class of 

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. Section 311 

identifies factors for the Secretary to 

consider and Federal agencies to consult 

before we may find that reasonable 

grounds exist for concluding that a 

jurisdiction, institution, class of 

transactions, or type of account is of 

primary money laundering concern. The 

statute also provides similar procedures, 

including factors and consultation 

requirements, for selecting the specific 

special measures to be imposed against 

the primary money laundering concern. 

Taken as a whole, section 311 

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 give us the authority to 

bring additional and useful pressure on 

those jurisdictions and institutions that 

pose money-laundering threats and 

allow us to take steps to protect the U.S. 

financial system. Through the 

imposition of various special measures, 

we can gain more information about the 

concerned jurisdictions, institutions, 

transactions, and accounts; monitor 

more effectively the respective 

jurisdictions, institutions, transactions, 

and accounts; and ultimately protect 

U.S. financial institutions from 

involvement with jurisdictions, 

institutions, transactions, or accounts 

that pose a money laundering concern. 

Before making a finding that 

reasonable grounds exist for concluding 

that a foreign financial institution is of 

primary money laundering concern, the 

Secretary is required by the Bank 

Secrecy Act to consult with both the 

Secretary of State and the Attorney 

General. 

In addition to these consultations, 

when finding that a foreign financial 

institution is of primary money 

laundering concern, the Secretary is 

required by section 311 to consider 

‘‘such information as [we] determine to 


cchase on PROD1PC60 with RULES