Daily Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of the Federal Government
You may obtain an electronic copy using the Internet by—
(1) Searching the Department of Transportation's electronic Docket Management System (DMS) Web page (
(2) Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at
(3) Visiting the TSA's Law and Policy Web page at
In addition, copies are available by writing or calling the individual in the
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 requires TSA to comply with small entity requests for information and advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within TSA's jurisdiction. Any small entity that has a question regarding this document may contact the person listed in
On June 1, 2004, TSA published a notice in the
In conjunction with the establishment of Registered Traveler Operations Files (DHS/TSA 015), TSA published a notice of proposed rulemaking on September 8, 2004, to exempt this system of records from several provisions of the Privacy Act. See 69 FR 54256. Specifically, TSA proposed to exempt the system of records from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) (accounting of disclosures); (d) (access to records); (e)(1) (relevancy and necessity of information); (e)(4)(G), (H) and (I) (agency requirements); and (f) (agency rules) pursuant to exemptions (k)(1) and (k)(2) of the Act. TSA claimed these exemptions in accordance with the Privacy Act so that the security aspects of the system may properly function, and to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of classified and law enforcement information.
TSA did not receive any comments on the proposed rule but made two minor, non-substantive changes. TSA revised § 1507.3(i)(1) (Accounting for Disclosures) to reflect the fact that the “investigative interest” involved may be on the part of the Department of Homeland Security or other law enforcement or recipient agencies. In § 1507.3(i)(2) (Access to Records) TSA also revised the reference “security sensitive information” to read “sensitive security information protected pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 114(s) and 49 CFR part 1520 * * *”. TSA therefore adopts the proposed rule as final with these minor modifications.
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501.
This rule is not a “significant regulatory action” within the meaning of Executive Order 12886. Because the economic impact should be minimal, further regulatory evaluation is not necessary. Moreover, I certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, because the reporting requirements themselves are not changed and because it applies only to information on individuals.
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), (Pub. L. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48), requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of certain regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector. UMRA requires a written statement of economic and regulatory alternatives for proposed and final rules that contain Federal mandates. A “Federal mandate” is a new or additional enforceable duty, imposed on any State, local, or tribal government, or the private sector. If any Federal mandate causes those entities to spend, in aggregate, $100 million or more in any one year the UMRA analysis is required. This rule will not impose Federal mandates on any State, local, or tribal government or the private sector.
TSA has analyzed this rule under the principles and criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, and therefore will not have federalism implications.
TSA has reviewed this action for purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) and has determined that this action will not have a significant effect on the human environment.
The energy impact of this document has been assessed in accordance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) Public Law 94-163, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6362). We have determined that this rulemaking is not a major regulatory action under the provisions of the EPCA.
Privacy, Transportation security.
49 U.S.C. 114(l)(1), 40113, 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) and (k).
(1) From subsection (c)(3) (Accounting for Disclosures) because release of the accounting of disclosures could alert the subject of heightened security concerns relating to an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to the existence of an investigative interest on the part of the Department of Homeland Security or another Federal law enforcement or other recipient agency. Disclosure of the accounting would therefore present a serious impediment to transportation security law enforcement efforts and efforts to preserve national security. Disclosure of the accounting would also permit the individual who is the subject of a record to impede the program suitability determination, which undermines the entire system.
(2) From subsection (d) (Access to Records) because access to some of the records contained in this system of records could permit the individual who is the subject of a record to impede the program suitability determination. Amendment of the records would
(3) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and Necessity of Information) because in the course of screening applicants for program suitability, TSA must be able to review information from a variety of sources. What information is relevant and necessary may not always be apparent until after the evaluation is completed. In the interests of transportation security, it is appropriate to include a broad range of information that may aid in determining an applicant's suitability for the Registered Traveler program.
(4) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (H) and (I) (Agency Requirements), and (f) (Agency Rules), because this system is exempt from the access and amendment provisions of subsection (d).