Driver's Licenses and Personal Identification Cards, 8756-8761 [05-3458]
Download as PDF
8756
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 23, 2005 / Proposed Rules
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–3451 Filed 2–22–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–U
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[FRL–7875–6]
Mississippi: Final Authorization of
State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revisions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: Mississippi has applied to
EPA for Final authorization of the
changes to its hazardous waste program
under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA proposes to
grant final authorization to Mississippi
for RCRA Clusters IV through X. In the
‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this
Federal Register, EPA is authorizing the
changes by an immediate final rule. EPA
did not make a proposal prior to the
immediate final rule because we believe
this action is not controversial and do
not expect comments that oppose it. We
have explained the reasons for this
authorization in the preamble to the
immediate final rule. Unless we get
written comments which oppose this
authorization during the comment
period, the immediate final rule will
become effective on the date it
establishes, and we will not take further
action on this proposal. If we get
comments that oppose this action, we
will withdraw the immediate final rule
and it will not take effect. We will then
respond to public comments in a later
final rule based on this proposal. You
may not have another opportunity for
comment. If you want to comment on
this action, you must do so at this time.
DATES: Send your written comments by
March 25, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments by
one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail: middlebrooks.gail@epa.gov.
• Fax: (404) 562–8439 (prior to
faxing, please notify the EPA contact
listed below).
• Mail: Send written comments to
Gail Middlebrooks at the address listed
below.
Instructions: Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected through https://
www.regulations.gov, or e-mail. The
Federal regulations.gov Web site is an
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:25 Feb 22, 2005
Jkt 205001
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your
comments. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit.
You can view and copy Mississippi’s
applications from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at
the following addresses: Mississippi
Department of Environmental Quality,
Hazardous Waste Division, 101 W.
Capital, Suite 100, Jackson, Mississippi
39201; and EPA, Region 4, Library, 9th
Floor, The Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal
Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta,
Georgia 30303–3104; (404) 562–8190.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gail
Middlebrooks, RCRA Services Section,
RCRA Programs Branch, Waste
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, The Sam Nunn Atlanta
Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–3104; (404) 562–
8494.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For
additional information, please see the
immediate final rule published in the
‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this
Federal Register.
Dated: February 2, 2005.
A. Stanley Meilburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 05–3364 Filed 2–22–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
49 CFR Subtitle A
[Docket No. OST–2005–20434]
Driver’s Licenses and Personal
Identification Cards
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST),
DOT.
ACTION: Notice of intent to form a
negotiated rulemaking advisory
committee.
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the portion of the
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004 known as the 9/
11 Commission Implementation Act of
2004, the Office of the Secretary, DOT,
is establishing a committee to develop,
through negotiated rulemaking
procedures, recommendations for
minimum standards to tighten the
security for driver’s licenses and
personal identification cards issued by
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
States, in order for these documents to
qualify for use by Federal agencies for
identification purposes. The committee
will consist of persons who represent
the interests affected by the proposed
rule, i.e., State offices that issue driver’s
licenses or personal identification cards,
elected State officials, the Departments
of Transportation and Homeland
Security, and other interested parties.
The purpose of this document is to
invite interested parties to submit
comments on the issues to be discussed
and the interests and organizations to be
considered for representation on the
committee.
DATES: You should submit your
comments or applications for
membership or nominations for
membership on the negotiated
rulemaking committee early enough to
ensure that the Department’s Docket
Management System (DMS) receives
them not later than March 25, 2005.
Late-filed comments will be considered
to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: You should mention the
docket number of this document in your
comments or application/nomination
for membership and submit them in
writing to: Docket Management System
(DMS), Room PL–401, 400 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.
Commenters may also submit their
comments electronically. Instructions
for electronic submission may be found
at the following Web address: https://
dms.dot.gov/submit/.
You may call the Docket at 202–366–
9324, and visit it from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday. Interested
persons may view docketed materials on
the Internet at any time. Instructions for
doing so are found at the end of this
notice.
You may read the comments received
by DMS at the address given above
under ADDRESSES. The hours of the
Docket are indicated above in the same
location.
You may also review all documents in
the docket via the internet. To read
docket materials on the internet, take
the following steps:
1. Go to the DMS Web page of the
Department of Transportation (https://
dms.dot.gov/).
2. On that page, click on ‘‘search.’’
3. On the next page (https://
dms.dot.gov/search/), type in the fourdigit docket number shown at the
beginning of this document. Example: If
the docket number were OST–2005–
1234,’’ you would type ‘‘1234.’’ After
typing the docket number, click on
‘‘search.’’
4. On the next page, which contains
docket summary information for the
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 23, 2005 / Proposed Rules
docket you selected, click on the desired
comments. You may download the
comments. The comments are word
searchable.
Please note that even after the
comment closing date, we will continue
to file relevant information in the
Docket as it becomes available. Further,
some people may submit late comments.
Accordingly, we recommend that you
periodically check the Docket for new
material.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert C. Ashby, Deputy Assistant
General Counsel for Regulation and
Enforcement, Office of the General
Counsel, at 202–366–9310
(bob.ashby@dot.gov), or Steve Wood,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Vehicle
Safety Standards and Harmonization,
Office of the Chief Counsel, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
202–366–2992
(steve.wood@nhtsa.dot.gov) Their
mailing addresses are at the Department
of Transportation, 400 7th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590, at rooms 10424
and 5219, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On December 17, 2004, the President
signed into law the Intelligence Reform
and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.
(Public Law No. 108–458). Title VII of
that Act is known as the 9/11
Commission Implementation Act of
2004 (the 9/11 Act). Subtitle B of the 9/
11 Act addresses terrorist travel and
effective screening. Among other things,
subtitle B mandates the issuance of
minimum standards for Federal
acceptance of birth certificates (section
7211), and driver’s licenses and
personal identification cards (section
7212). It also establishes requirements
for enhancing the security of social
security cards (section 7213). This
notice concerns section 7212.
A bill currently under consideration
in Congress (H.R. 418), if enacted and
signed into law as passed by the House,
would terminate the Department’s
negotiated rulemaking. The
Administration has endorsed this bill,
which would repeal section 7212 which
is the basis for the Department’s
rulemaking. Until and unless such
legislation is enacted, however, the
Department is taking the steps necessary
to meet the existing statutory deadline.
This notice describes the procedure that
we propose to use in implementing
section 7212, as long as it remains in
effect.
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:25 Feb 22, 2005
Jkt 205001
II. Statutory Mandate for Minimum
Standards on Driver’s Licenses and
Personal Identification Cards
Section 7212 of the 9/11 Act requires
the Secretary of Transportation, in
consultation with the Secretary of
Homeland Security, to establish, by
regulation, minimum standards for
driver’s licenses or personal
identification cards issued by a State in
order to qualify for use by Federal
agencies for identification purposes.
This provision was enacted in
response to the following
recommendation in the 9/11
Commission report:
Recommendation: Secure identification
should begin in the United States. The
Federal government should set standards for
the issuance of birth certificates and sources
of identification, such as drivers licenses.
Fraud in identification documents is no
longer just a problem of theft. At many entry
points to vulnerable facilities, including gates
for boarding aircraft, sources of identification
are the last opportunity to ensure that people
are who they say they are and to check
whether they are terrorists.1
In making that recommendation, the
Commission noted:
All but one of the 9/11 hijackers acquired
some form of U.S. identification document,
some by fraud. Acquisition of these forms of
identification would have assisted them in
boarding commercial flights, renting cars,
and other necessary activities.2
A. Substance of the Standards
Section 7212(b)(2) of the 9/11 Act
requires that the standards to be
established by the Secretary of
Transportation include—
(A) standards for documentation
required as proof of identity of an
applicant for a driver’s license or
personal identification card;
(B) standards for the verifiability of
documents used to obtain a driver’s
license or personal identification card;
(C) standards for the processing of
applications for driver’s licenses and
personal identification cards to prevent
fraud;
(D) standards for information to be
included on each driver’s license or
personal identification card,
including—
(i) the person’s full legal name;
(ii) the person’s date of birth;
(iii) the person’s gender;
(iv) the person’s driver’s license or
personal identification card number;
(v) a digital photograph of the person;
(vi) the person’s address of principal
residence; and
PO 00000
1 9/11
Commission Report, page 390.
2 Ibid.
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8757
(vii) the person’s signature; 3
(E) standards for common machinereadable identity information to be
included on each driver’s license or
personal identification card, including
defined minimum data elements;
(F) security standards to ensure that
driver’s licenses and personal
identification cards are—
(i) resistant to tampering, alteration,
or counterfeiting; and
(ii) capable of accommodating and
ensuring the security of a digital
photograph or other unique identifier;
and
(G) a requirement that a State
confiscate a driver’s license or personal
identification card if any component or
security feature of the license or
identification card is compromised.
Section 7212(b)(3) requires further
that the standards—
(A) shall facilitate communication
between the chief driver licensing
official of a State, an appropriate official
of a Federal agency and other relevant
officials, to verify the authenticity of
documents, as appropriate, issued by
such Federal agency or entity and
presented to prove the identity of an
individual;
(B) may not infringe on a State’s
power to set criteria concerning what
categories of individuals are eligible to
obtain a driver’s license or personal
identification card from that State;
(C) may not require a State to comply
with any such regulation that conflicts
with or otherwise interferes with the
full enforcement of State criteria
concerning the categories of individuals
that are eligible to obtain a driver’s
license or personal identification card
from that State;
(D) may not require a single design to
which driver’s licenses or personal
identification cards issued by all States
must conform; and
(E) shall include procedures and
requirements to protect the privacy
rights of individuals who apply for and
hold driver’s licenses and personal
identification cards.
B. Process for Developing
Recommendations for Proposed
Standards
The 9/11 Act requires that before
publishing proposed minimum
3 Section 7214 of the Act provides that no State
or subdivision thereof may ‘‘display a social
security account number issued by the
Commissioner of Social Security (or any derivative
of such number) on any driver’s license, motor
vehicle registration, or personal identification card
(as defined in section 7212(a)(2) of the 9/11
Commission Implementation Act of 2004), or
include, on any such license, registration, or
personal identification card, a magnetic strip, bar
code, or other means of communication which
conveys such number (or derivative thereof).’’
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
8758
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 23, 2005 / Proposed Rules
standards, the Secretary of
Transportation must establish a
negotiated rulemaking process pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 561 et seq.,4 and receive such
recommendations regarding a proposed
as the regulatory negotiation committee
may adopt. The committee must include
representatives from—
(i) among State offices that issue
driver’s licenses or personal
identification cards;
(ii) among State elected officials;
(iii) the Department of Homeland
Security; and
(iv) among interested parties.5
C. Schedule for Submitting
Recommendations and Establishing the
Standards
The recommendations of the
negotiated rulemaking committee must
be submitted to the Secretary of
Transportation not later than 9 months
after the date of enactment, i.e., by
September 17, 2005.6 The Secretary
must issue a final rule establishing the
standards not later than 18 months after
the date of enactment, i.e., by June 17,
2006.7
D. Implementation of the Standards
Section 7212(b)(1)(C) provides that
each State must certify to the Secretary
of Transportation that the State is in
compliance with the requirements of
this section. The certifications are to be
made at such intervals and in such a
manner as the Secretary of
Transportation may prescribe by
regulation.
Further, Section 7212(b)(1)(A) bars all
Federal agencies from accepting, for any
official purpose, a driver’s license or
personal identification card that is
newly issued by a State more than 2
years after the issuance of the minimum
standards (i.e., by June 17, 2008) unless
the driver’s license or personal
identification card conforms to those
standards.8 As to all driver’s licenses
and personal identification cards,
regardless of when they were issued, the
Secretary of Transportation, in
consultation with the Secretary of
Homeland Security, is required by
Section 7212(b)(1)(B) to set a date after
which all Federal agencies are barred
from accepting any driver’s license or
personal identification card for any
4 Section
7212(b)(4)(A).
7212(b)(4)(B).
6 Section 7212(b)(4)(C)(i).
7 Section 7212(b)(2). See also Section
7212(b)(4)(C)(ii).
8 Section 7212(d) provides that the Secretary may
extend this date ‘‘for up to 2 years for driver’s
licenses issued by a State if the Secretary
determines that the State made reasonable efforts to
comply with the date under * * * [section 7212(b)]
* * * but was unable to do so.’’
5 Section
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:25 Feb 22, 2005
Jkt 205001
official purpose unless such driver’s
license or personal identification card
conforms to the minimum standards.
III. Negotiated Rulemaking
As required by Section 7212 (b)(4)(C),
the Office of the Secretary will conduct
the mandated negotiated rulemaking in
accordance with the Negotiated
Rulemaking Act of 1990, Public Law
101–648 (NRA) (5 U.S.C. 561, et seq.).
The NRA establishes a framework for
the conduct of a negotiated rulemaking
and encourages agencies to use
negotiated rulemaking to enhance the
informal rulemaking process. Pursuant
to Section 7212 and the NRA, OST will
form an advisory committee consisting
of representatives of the affected
interests for the purpose of reaching
consensus, if possible, on the proposed
rule.
A. The Concept of Negotiated
Rulemaking
Usually, DOT develops a rulemaking
proposal using its own staff and
consultant resources. The concerns of
affected parties are made known
through means such as various informal
contacts and advance notices of
proposed rulemaking published in the
Federal Register. After the notice of
proposed rulemaking is published for
comment, affected parties may submit
arguments and data defining and
supporting their positions with regard to
the issues raised in the proposed rule.
All comments from affected parties are
directed to the Department’s docket for
the rulemaking. In general, there is
limited communication among parties
representing different interests. Many
times, effective regulations have
resulted from such a process.
However, as Congress noted in the
NRA, such regulatory development
procedures may ‘‘discourage the
affected parties from meeting and
communicating with each other, and
may cause parties with different
interests to assume conflicting and
antagonistic positions * * *’’ (Sec. 2(2)
of Pub. L. No. 101–648). Congress also
stated ‘‘adversarial rulemaking deprives
the affected parties and the public of the
benefits of face-to-face negotiations and
cooperation in developing and reaching
agreement on a rule. It also deprives
them of the benefits of shared
information, knowledge, expertise, and
technical abilities possessed by the
affected parties.’’ (Sec. 2(3) of Pub. L.
No. 101–648).
Using negotiated rulemaking to
develop the proposed rule is
fundamentally different. Negotiated
rulemaking is a process in which a
proposed rule is developed by a
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
committee composed of representatives
of all those interests that will be
significantly affected by the rule.
Decisions are made by some form of
consensus, which generally requires a
measure of concurrence among the
interests represented.9 An agency
desiring to initiate the process does so
by carefully identifying all interests
potentially affected by the rulemaking
under consideration. To help in this
identification process, the agency
publishes a notice, such as this one,
which identifies a preliminary list of
interests and requests public comment
on that list. Following receipt of the
comments, the agency establishes an
advisory committee representing these
various interests to negotiate a
consensus on the terms of a proposed
rule. The committee is chartered under
the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA; 5 U.S.C. App. 2). Representation
on the committee may be direct, that is,
each member represents a specific
interest, or may be indirect, through
coalitions of parties formed for this
purpose. The establishing agency has a
member of the committee representing
the Federal government’s own set of
interests.10 A facilitator or mediator can
assist the negotiated rulemaking
advisory committee by facilitating the
negotiation process. The role of this
mediator, or facilitator, is to apply
proven consensus building techniques
to the advisory committee setting.
Once a regulatory negotiation
advisory committee reaches consensus
on the provisions of a proposed rule, the
agency, consistent with its legal
obligations, uses this consensus as the
basis of its proposed rule and publishes
it in the Federal Register. This provides
the required public notice under the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA; 5
U.S.C. 551 et seq.) and allows for a
public comment period. Under the APA,
the public retains the right to comment.
The Department anticipates, however,
that the pre-proposal consensus agreed
upon by this committee will effectively
address virtually all major issues prior
to publication of a proposed
rulemaking.
9 The Negotiated Rulemaking Act defines
‘‘consensus’’ as ‘‘unanimous concurrence among
the interests represented on a negotiated
rulemaking committee * * * unless such
committee (A) agrees to define such term to mean
a general but not unanimous concurrence; or (B)
agrees upon another specified definition.’’ 5 U.S.C.
562(2).
10 In this regulatory negotiation, both the
Departments of Transportation and Homeland
Security are required by statute to represent the
Federal government’s interests.
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 23, 2005 / Proposed Rules
B. The Department of Transportation’s
Commitment
In initiating this regulatory
negotiation process, the Department
plans to provide adequate resources to
ensure timely and successful
completion of the process. This includes
making the process a priority activity for
all representatives, components,
officials, and personnel of the
Department who need to be involved in
the rulemaking, from the time of
initiation until such time as a final rule
is issued or the process is expressly
terminated. The Department will
provide administrative support for the
process and will take steps to ensure
that the negotiated rulemaking
committee has the appropriate resources
it requires to complete its work in a
timely fashion. These include the
provision or procurement of such
support services as properly equipped
space adequate for public meetings and
caucuses; logistical support; word
processing and distribution of
background information; the services of
a convenor/facilitator; and such
additional research and other technical
assistance as may be necessary.
To the extent possible, consistent
with its legal obligations, the
Department currently plans to use any
consensus arising from the regulatory
negotiation committee as the basis for
the proposed minimum standards to be
published for public notice and
comment.11
C. Negotiating Consensus
As discussed above, the negotiated
rulemaking process is fundamentally
different from the usual development
process for developing a proposed rule.
Negotiation allows interested and
affected parties to discuss possible
approaches to various issues rather than
simply being asked in a regular notice
and comment rulemaking proceeding to
respond to details on a proposal
developed and issued by an agency. The
negotiation process involves a mutual
education of the parties by each other
on the practical concerns about the
impact of various approaches. Each
committee member participates in
resolving the interests and concerns of
other members, rather than leaving it up
11 The Department of Transportation is obligated
under Section 7212 to propose and adopt minimum
standards regardless of whether the committee to be
established pursuant to Section 7212 is able to
achieve consensus on all required elements of those
standards. Thus, if the committee were unable to
reach consensus on any of the elements, the
Department of Transportation would, in
consultation with the Department of Homeland
Security, independently develop proposals
regarding those elements.
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:25 Feb 22, 2005
Jkt 205001
to the agency to bridge different points
of view.
A key principle of negotiated
rulemaking is that agreement is by
consensus. Thus, no one interest or
group of interests is able to control the
process. Under the NRA as noted above,
‘‘consensus’’ usually means the
unanimous concurrence among interests
represented on a negotiated rulemaking
committee, though a different definition
may be employed in some cases. In
addition, experience has demonstrated
that using a professional mediator to
facilitate this process will assist all
potential parties, including helping to
identify their interests in the rule and
enabling them to reevaluate previously
stated positions on issues involved in
the rulemaking effort.
D. Key Issues for Negotiation; Invitation
to Comment on Issues To Be Addressed
As noted above, Section 7212 sets
forth considerable detail regarding the
issues to be addressed in developing
and promulgating the mandated
minimum standards. The Department
invites comment on the issues regarding
the particular aspects of the standards
that the negotiating committee should
address in developing its
recommendations or report.
The Department is aware of the
considerable work that has been and is
being done at Federal and State levels
and in the private sector to improve
various types of identification
documents, including driver’s licenses.
We invite comment on which of these
past and ongoing efforts are most
relevant to this rulemaking, and on what
implications those efforts have for the
recommendations and choices to be
made in this rulemaking.
IV. Procedures and Guidelines for This
Regulatory Negotiation
The following proposed procedures
and guidelines will apply to the
regulatory negotiation process, subject
to appropriate changes made as a result
of comments on this Notice or as
determined to be necessary during the
negotiating process.
A. Notice of Intent To Establish
Advisory Committee and Request for
Comment
In accordance with the requirements
of FACA, an agency of the Federal
government cannot establish or utilize a
group of people in the interest of
obtaining consensus advice or
recommendations unless that group is
chartered as a Federal advisory
committee. It is the purpose of this
Notice to indicate the Department’s
intent to create a Federal advisory
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8759
committee, to identify the issues
involved in the rulemaking, to identify
the interests affected by the rulemaking,
to identify potential participants who
will adequately represent those
interests, and to ask for comment on the
identification of the issues, interests,
procedures, and participants.
B. Facilitator
Pursuant to the NRA (5 U.S.C. 566),
a facilitator will be selected to serve as
an impartial chair of the meetings; assist
committee members to conduct
discussions and negotiations; and
manage the keeping of minutes and
records as required by FACA. The
facilitator will chair the negotiations,
may offer alternative suggestions to
committee members to help achieve the
desired consensus, will help
participants define and reach
consensus, and will determine the
feasibility of negotiating particular
issues. The Department has selected Ms.
Susan Podziba, an experienced
mediator, as its convenor/facilitator for
this regulatory negotiation.
C. Membership
The NRA provides that the agency
establishing the regulatory negotiation
advisory committee ‘‘shall limit
membership to 25 members, unless the
agency head determines that a greater
number of members is necessary for the
functioning of the committee or to
achieve balanced membership.’’ The
purpose of the limit on membership is
to promote committee efficiency in
deliberating and reaching decisions on
recommendations. The Department of
Transportation’s current inclination is
to observe that limit. However, the
Department notes that its experience
with regulatory negotiations indicates
that limiting membership to fewer than
25 members is often desirable.
D. Interests Likely To Be Affected;
Representation of Those Interests
The committee will include a
representative from the Department of
Transportation and from the interests
and organizations listed below. Each
representative may also name an
alternate, who will be encouraged to
attend all committee meetings and will
serve in place of the representative if
necessary. The DOT representative is
the Designated Federal Official (DFO
and will participate in the deliberations
and activities of the committee with the
same rights and responsibilities as other
committee members. The DFO will be
authorized to fully represent the
Department in the discussions and
negotiations of the committee.
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
8760
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 23, 2005 / Proposed Rules
The Department has tentatively
identified the following organizations or
interests to participate in the negotiated
rulemaking. The convenor will contact
these and other organizations to
determine their interests and
willingness to serve on the committee.
(1) Department of Transportation.
(2) Department of Homeland Security.
(3) State offices that issue driver’s
licenses or personal identification cards;
American Association of Motor Vehicle
Administrators.
(4) Representatives of elected State
officials; National Governors
Association; National Conference of
State Legislatures; National Association
of Attorneys General.
(5) Other interested parties.
(a) Groups or organizations presenting
the interests of applicants for and
holders of driver’s licenses and personal
identification cards.
(i) Consumer organization.
(ii) Organization representing noncitizens/immigrants.
(b) Organizations with technological
and operational expertise in document
security.
(c) Privacy and civil liberties groups.
(d) Law enforcement officials.
The first four interests identified
above are required by the statute to
participate in the negotiated
rulemaking.12 The ‘‘other interests’’
mentioned are those that appear to the
Department to have potentially
important roles in helping achieve
consensus on recommendations on the
issues involved. The Department seeks
comment on whether there are
additional interests that should be
represented on the committee. The
Department also seeks comments on
particular organizations and individuals
who would appropriately represent
interests on the committee. Please
identify such organizations and interests
if they exist and explain why they
should have separate representation on
the committee.
The list of potential parties
specifically named above is not
presented as a complete or exclusive list
from which committee members will be
selected, nor does inclusion on the list
of potential parties mean that a party on
the list has agreed to participate as a
member of the committee or as a
member of a coalition, or will
necessarily be invited to serve on the
committee. The list merely indicates
parties that DOT has tentatively
identified as representing significantly
affected interests in the outcome of the
proposed rule. This document gives
notice of this process to other potential
12 Section
7212(b)(4)(B).
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:25 Feb 22, 2005
Jkt 205001
participants and affords them the
opportunity to request representation in
the negotiations. The procedure for
requesting such representation is set out
below. In addition, comments and
suggestions on this tentative list are
invited.
The Department is aware that there
are many more potential participants,
whether they are listed here or not, than
there are membership slots on the
committee. We do not believe, nor does
the NRA contemplate, that each
potentially affected group must
participate directly in the negotiations.
What is important is that each affected
interest be adequately represented. To
have a successful negotiation, it is
important for interested parties to
identify and form coalitions that
adequately represent significantly
affected interests. These coalitions, to
provide adequate representation, must
agree to support, both financially and
technically, a member to the committee
whom they will choose to represent
their ‘‘interest.’’ Those selected, it
should be noted, represent one or more
interests, not just themselves or their
organizations.
It is very important to recognize that
interested parties who are not selected
to membership on the committee can
make valuable contributions to this
negotiated rulemaking effort in any of
several ways:
• The person or organization could
request to be placed on the committee
mailing list, submitting written
comments, as appropriate;
• Any member of the public could
attend the committee meetings, caucus
with his or her interest’s member on the
committee, and, as provided in FACA,
speak to the committee. Time will be set
aside during each meeting for this
purpose, consistent with the
committee’s need for sufficient time to
complete its deliberations; or
• The person or organization could
assist in the work of a workgroup that
might be established by the committee.
Informal workgroups are usually
established by an advisory committee to
assist the committee in ‘‘staffing’’
various technical matters (e.g.,
researching or preparing summaries of
the technical literature or comments on
particular matters such as economic
issues) before the committee so as to
facilitate committee deliberations. They
also might assist in estimating costs and
drafting regulatory text on issues
associated with the analysis of the costs
and benefits addressed, and formulating
drafts of the various provisions and
their justification previously developed
by the committee. Given their staffing
function, workgroups usually consist of
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
participants who have expertise or
particular interest in the technical
matter(s) being studied.
E. Applications for Membership
Each application for membership or
nomination to the committee should
include:
(i) the name of the applicant or
nominee and the interest(s) such person
would represent;
(ii) evidence that the applicant or
nominee is authorized to represent
parties related to the interest(s) the
person proposes to represent; and
(iii) a written commitment that the
applicant or nominee would participate
in good faith.
Please be aware that each individual
or organization affected by a final rule
need not have its own representative on
the committee. Rather, each interest
must be adequately represented, and the
committee should be fairly balanced.
F. Good Faith Negotiation
Committee members should be
willing to negotiate in good faith and
have the authority from his or her
constituency to do so. The first step is
to ensure that each member has good
communications with his or her
constituencies. An intra-interest
network of communication should be
established to bring information from
the support organization to the member
at the table, and to take information
from the table back to the support
organization. Second, each organization
or coalition should, therefore, designate
as its representative an official with
credibility and authority to insure that
needed information is provided and
decisions are made in a timely fashion.
Negotiated rulemaking efforts can
require a very significant contribution of
time by the appointed members for the
duration of the negotiation process.
Other qualities that are very helpful are
negotiating experience and skills, and
sufficient technical knowledge to
participate in substantive negotiations.
Certain concepts are central to
negotiating in good faith. One is the
willingness to bring all issues to the
bargaining table in an attempt to reach
a consensus, instead of keeping key
issues in reserve. The second is a
willingness to promote and protect the
ability of the committee to conduct its
negotiations. Finally, good faith
includes a willingness to move away
from the type of positions usually taken
in a more traditional rulemaking
process, and instead explore openly
with other parties all ideas that may
emerge from the discussions of the
committee.
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 23, 2005 / Proposed Rules
G. Notice of Establishment
After evaluating comments received
as a result of this Notice, the
Department will issue a notice
announcing the establishment and
composition of the committee. After the
committee is chartered, the negotiations
will begin.
H. Administrative Support and Meetings
Staff support will be provided by the
Department. Meetings are currently
expected to take place in Washington,
DC.
I. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
The committee’s objective will be to
prepare a report, consisting of its
consensus recommendations for the
regulatory text of a draft notice of
proposed rulemaking. This report may
also include suggestions for the NPRM
preamble, regulatory evaluation, or
other supplemental documents. If the
committee cannot achieve consensus on
some aspects of the proposed regulatory
text, it will, pursuant to the ‘‘ground
rules’’ the committee has established,
identify in its report those areas of
disagreement, and provide explanations
for any disagreement. The Department
will use the information and
recommendations from the committee
report to draft a notice of proposed
rulemaking and, as appropriate,
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:25 Feb 22, 2005
Jkt 205001
supporting documents. Committee
recommendations and other documents
produced by the committee will be
placed in the rulemaking docket.
In the event that the Department’s
NPRM differs from the committee’s
consensus recommendations, the
preamble to an NPRM addressing the
issues that were the subject of the
negotiations will explain the reasons for
the decision to depart from the
committee’s recommendations.
Following the issuance of NPRM and
comment period, the Department will
prepare and provide to the committee a
comment summary. The committee will
then be asked to determine whether the
committee should reconvene to discuss
changes to the NPRM based on the
comments.
J. Committee Procedures
Under the general guidance of the
facilitator, and subject to legal
requirements, the committee will
establish detailed procedures for the
meetings. The meetings of the
committee will be open to the public.
Any person attending the committee
meetings may address the committee if
time permits or file statements with the
committee.
K. Record of Meetings
In accordance with FACA
requirements, the facilitator will prepare
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8761
summaries of all committee meetings.
These summaries will be placed in the
public docket for this rulemaking.
L. Tentative Schedule
The Department is seeking to convene
the first of the committee’s meetings by
the last week of March 2005. The date
and exact location of that meeting will
be announced in the agency’s notice of
establishment of the advisory
committee. Meetings are expected to last
approximately three and a half days
each. The negotiation process will
proceed according to a schedule of
specific dates for subsequent meetings
that the committee devises at its first
meeting. We will publish a single notice
of the schedule of all future meetings in
the Federal Register, but will amend the
notice through subsequent Federal
Register notices if it becomes necessary
to do so. The interval between meetings
will be approximately two weeks.
The first meeting will commence with
an overview of the regulatory
negotiation process conducted by the
facilitator.
Issued this 17th day of February, 2005, in
Washington, DC.
Jeffrey A. Rosen,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 05–3458 Filed 2–17–05; 4:26 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910–62–P
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 23, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8756-8761]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-3458]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
49 CFR Subtitle A
[Docket No. OST-2005-20434]
Driver's Licenses and Personal Identification Cards
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of intent to form a negotiated rulemaking advisory
committee.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the portion of the Intelligence Reform and
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 known as the 9/11 Commission
Implementation Act of 2004, the Office of the Secretary, DOT, is
establishing a committee to develop, through negotiated rulemaking
procedures, recommendations for minimum standards to tighten the
security for driver's licenses and personal identification cards issued
by States, in order for these documents to qualify for use by Federal
agencies for identification purposes. The committee will consist of
persons who represent the interests affected by the proposed rule,
i.e., State offices that issue driver's licenses or personal
identification cards, elected State officials, the Departments of
Transportation and Homeland Security, and other interested parties. The
purpose of this document is to invite interested parties to submit
comments on the issues to be discussed and the interests and
organizations to be considered for representation on the committee.
DATES: You should submit your comments or applications for membership
or nominations for membership on the negotiated rulemaking committee
early enough to ensure that the Department's Docket Management System
(DMS) receives them not later than March 25, 2005. Late-filed comments
will be considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: You should mention the docket number of this document in
your comments or application/nomination for membership and submit them
in writing to: Docket Management System (DMS), Room PL-401, 400 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Commenters may also submit their
comments electronically. Instructions for electronic submission may be
found at the following Web address: https://dms.dot.gov/submit/.
You may call the Docket at 202-366-9324, and visit it from 10 a.m.
to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. Interested persons may view docketed
materials on the Internet at any time. Instructions for doing so are
found at the end of this notice.
You may read the comments received by DMS at the address given
above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are indicated above in
the same location.
You may also review all documents in the docket via the internet.
To read docket materials on the internet, take the following steps:
1. Go to the DMS Web page of the Department of Transportation
(https://dms.dot.gov/).
2. On that page, click on ``search.''
3. On the next page (https://dms.dot.gov/search/), type in the four-
digit docket number shown at the beginning of this document. Example:
If the docket number were OST-2005-1234,'' you would type ``1234.''
After typing the docket number, click on ``search.''
4. On the next page, which contains docket summary information for
the
[[Page 8757]]
docket you selected, click on the desired comments. You may download
the comments. The comments are word searchable.
Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly,
we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert C. Ashby, Deputy Assistant
General Counsel for Regulation and Enforcement, Office of the General
Counsel, at 202-366-9310 (bob.ashby@dot.gov), or Steve Wood, Assistant
Chief Counsel for Vehicle Safety Standards and Harmonization, Office of
the Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 202-
366-2992 (steve.wood@nhtsa.dot.gov) Their mailing addresses are at the
Department of Transportation, 400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC
20590, at rooms 10424 and 5219, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On December 17, 2004, the President signed into law the
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. (Public Law
No. 108-458). Title VII of that Act is known as the 9/11 Commission
Implementation Act of 2004 (the 9/11 Act). Subtitle B of the 9/11 Act
addresses terrorist travel and effective screening. Among other things,
subtitle B mandates the issuance of minimum standards for Federal
acceptance of birth certificates (section 7211), and driver's licenses
and personal identification cards (section 7212). It also establishes
requirements for enhancing the security of social security cards
(section 7213). This notice concerns section 7212.
A bill currently under consideration in Congress (H.R. 418), if
enacted and signed into law as passed by the House, would terminate the
Department's negotiated rulemaking. The Administration has endorsed
this bill, which would repeal section 7212 which is the basis for the
Department's rulemaking. Until and unless such legislation is enacted,
however, the Department is taking the steps necessary to meet the
existing statutory deadline. This notice describes the procedure that
we propose to use in implementing section 7212, as long as it remains
in effect.
II. Statutory Mandate for Minimum Standards on Driver's Licenses and
Personal Identification Cards
Section 7212 of the 9/11 Act requires the Secretary of
Transportation, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland
Security, to establish, by regulation, minimum standards for driver's
licenses or personal identification cards issued by a State in order to
qualify for use by Federal agencies for identification purposes.
This provision was enacted in response to the following
recommendation in the 9/11 Commission report:
Recommendation: Secure identification should begin in the United
States. The Federal government should set standards for the issuance
of birth certificates and sources of identification, such as drivers
licenses. Fraud in identification documents is no longer just a
problem of theft. At many entry points to vulnerable facilities,
including gates for boarding aircraft, sources of identification are
the last opportunity to ensure that people are who they say they are
and to check whether they are terrorists.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 9/11 Commission Report, page 390.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In making that recommendation, the Commission noted:
All but one of the 9/11 hijackers acquired some form of U.S.
identification document, some by fraud. Acquisition of these forms
of identification would have assisted them in boarding commercial
flights, renting cars, and other necessary activities.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Substance of the Standards
Section 7212(b)(2) of the 9/11 Act requires that the standards to
be established by the Secretary of Transportation include--
(A) standards for documentation required as proof of identity of an
applicant for a driver's license or personal identification card;
(B) standards for the verifiability of documents used to obtain a
driver's license or personal identification card;
(C) standards for the processing of applications for driver's
licenses and personal identification cards to prevent fraud;
(D) standards for information to be included on each driver's
license or personal identification card, including--
(i) the person's full legal name;
(ii) the person's date of birth;
(iii) the person's gender;
(iv) the person's driver's license or personal identification card
number;
(v) a digital photograph of the person;
(vi) the person's address of principal residence; and
(vii) the person's signature; \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Section 7214 of the Act provides that no State or
subdivision thereof may ``display a social security account number
issued by the Commissioner of Social Security (or any derivative of
such number) on any driver's license, motor vehicle registration, or
personal identification card (as defined in section 7212(a)(2) of
the 9/11 Commission Implementation Act of 2004), or include, on any
such license, registration, or personal identification card, a
magnetic strip, bar code, or other means of communication which
conveys such number (or derivative thereof).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(E) standards for common machine-readable identity information to
be included on each driver's license or personal identification card,
including defined minimum data elements;
(F) security standards to ensure that driver's licenses and
personal identification cards are--
(i) resistant to tampering, alteration, or counterfeiting; and
(ii) capable of accommodating and ensuring the security of a
digital photograph or other unique identifier; and
(G) a requirement that a State confiscate a driver's license or
personal identification card if any component or security feature of
the license or identification card is compromised.
Section 7212(b)(3) requires further that the standards--
(A) shall facilitate communication between the chief driver
licensing official of a State, an appropriate official of a Federal
agency and other relevant officials, to verify the authenticity of
documents, as appropriate, issued by such Federal agency or entity and
presented to prove the identity of an individual;
(B) may not infringe on a State's power to set criteria concerning
what categories of individuals are eligible to obtain a driver's
license or personal identification card from that State;
(C) may not require a State to comply with any such regulation that
conflicts with or otherwise interferes with the full enforcement of
State criteria concerning the categories of individuals that are
eligible to obtain a driver's license or personal identification card
from that State;
(D) may not require a single design to which driver's licenses or
personal identification cards issued by all States must conform; and
(E) shall include procedures and requirements to protect the
privacy rights of individuals who apply for and hold driver's licenses
and personal identification cards.
B. Process for Developing Recommendations for Proposed Standards
The 9/11 Act requires that before publishing proposed minimum
[[Page 8758]]
standards, the Secretary of Transportation must establish a negotiated
rulemaking process pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 561 et seq.,\4\ and receive
such recommendations regarding a proposed as the regulatory negotiation
committee may adopt. The committee must include representatives from--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Section 7212(b)(4)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) among State offices that issue driver's licenses or personal
identification cards;
(ii) among State elected officials;
(iii) the Department of Homeland Security; and
(iv) among interested parties.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Section 7212(b)(4)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Schedule for Submitting Recommendations and Establishing the
Standards
The recommendations of the negotiated rulemaking committee must be
submitted to the Secretary of Transportation not later than 9 months
after the date of enactment, i.e., by September 17, 2005.\6\ The
Secretary must issue a final rule establishing the standards not later
than 18 months after the date of enactment, i.e., by June 17, 2006.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Section 7212(b)(4)(C)(i).
\7\ Section 7212(b)(2). See also Section 7212(b)(4)(C)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Implementation of the Standards
Section 7212(b)(1)(C) provides that each State must certify to the
Secretary of Transportation that the State is in compliance with the
requirements of this section. The certifications are to be made at such
intervals and in such a manner as the Secretary of Transportation may
prescribe by regulation.
Further, Section 7212(b)(1)(A) bars all Federal agencies from
accepting, for any official purpose, a driver's license or personal
identification card that is newly issued by a State more than 2 years
after the issuance of the minimum standards (i.e., by June 17, 2008)
unless the driver's license or personal identification card conforms to
those standards.\8\ As to all driver's licenses and personal
identification cards, regardless of when they were issued, the
Secretary of Transportation, in consultation with the Secretary of
Homeland Security, is required by Section 7212(b)(1)(B) to set a date
after which all Federal agencies are barred from accepting any driver's
license or personal identification card for any official purpose unless
such driver's license or personal identification card conforms to the
minimum standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Section 7212(d) provides that the Secretary may extend this
date ``for up to 2 years for driver's licenses issued by a State if
the Secretary determines that the State made reasonable efforts to
comply with the date under * * * [section 7212(b)] * * * but was
unable to do so.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Negotiated Rulemaking
As required by Section 7212 (b)(4)(C), the Office of the Secretary
will conduct the mandated negotiated rulemaking in accordance with the
Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990, Public Law 101-648 (NRA) (5 U.S.C.
561, et seq.). The NRA establishes a framework for the conduct of a
negotiated rulemaking and encourages agencies to use negotiated
rulemaking to enhance the informal rulemaking process. Pursuant to
Section 7212 and the NRA, OST will form an advisory committee
consisting of representatives of the affected interests for the purpose
of reaching consensus, if possible, on the proposed rule.
A. The Concept of Negotiated Rulemaking
Usually, DOT develops a rulemaking proposal using its own staff and
consultant resources. The concerns of affected parties are made known
through means such as various informal contacts and advance notices of
proposed rulemaking published in the Federal Register. After the notice
of proposed rulemaking is published for comment, affected parties may
submit arguments and data defining and supporting their positions with
regard to the issues raised in the proposed rule. All comments from
affected parties are directed to the Department's docket for the
rulemaking. In general, there is limited communication among parties
representing different interests. Many times, effective regulations
have resulted from such a process.
However, as Congress noted in the NRA, such regulatory development
procedures may ``discourage the affected parties from meeting and
communicating with each other, and may cause parties with different
interests to assume conflicting and antagonistic positions * * *''
(Sec. 2(2) of Pub. L. No. 101-648). Congress also stated ``adversarial
rulemaking deprives the affected parties and the public of the benefits
of face-to-face negotiations and cooperation in developing and reaching
agreement on a rule. It also deprives them of the benefits of shared
information, knowledge, expertise, and technical abilities possessed by
the affected parties.'' (Sec. 2(3) of Pub. L. No. 101-648).
Using negotiated rulemaking to develop the proposed rule is
fundamentally different. Negotiated rulemaking is a process in which a
proposed rule is developed by a committee composed of representatives
of all those interests that will be significantly affected by the rule.
Decisions are made by some form of consensus, which generally requires
a measure of concurrence among the interests represented.\9\ An agency
desiring to initiate the process does so by carefully identifying all
interests potentially affected by the rulemaking under consideration.
To help in this identification process, the agency publishes a notice,
such as this one, which identifies a preliminary list of interests and
requests public comment on that list. Following receipt of the
comments, the agency establishes an advisory committee representing
these various interests to negotiate a consensus on the terms of a
proposed rule. The committee is chartered under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA; 5 U.S.C. App. 2). Representation on the committee
may be direct, that is, each member represents a specific interest, or
may be indirect, through coalitions of parties formed for this purpose.
The establishing agency has a member of the committee representing the
Federal government's own set of interests.\10\ A facilitator or
mediator can assist the negotiated rulemaking advisory committee by
facilitating the negotiation process. The role of this mediator, or
facilitator, is to apply proven consensus building techniques to the
advisory committee setting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The Negotiated Rulemaking Act defines ``consensus'' as
``unanimous concurrence among the interests represented on a
negotiated rulemaking committee * * * unless such committee (A)
agrees to define such term to mean a general but not unanimous
concurrence; or (B) agrees upon another specified definition.'' 5
U.S.C. 562(2).
\10\ In this regulatory negotiation, both the Departments of
Transportation and Homeland Security are required by statute to
represent the Federal government's interests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once a regulatory negotiation advisory committee reaches consensus
on the provisions of a proposed rule, the agency, consistent with its
legal obligations, uses this consensus as the basis of its proposed
rule and publishes it in the Federal Register. This provides the
required public notice under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA; 5
U.S.C. 551 et seq.) and allows for a public comment period. Under the
APA, the public retains the right to comment. The Department
anticipates, however, that the pre-proposal consensus agreed upon by
this committee will effectively address virtually all major issues
prior to publication of a proposed rulemaking.
[[Page 8759]]
B. The Department of Transportation's Commitment
In initiating this regulatory negotiation process, the Department
plans to provide adequate resources to ensure timely and successful
completion of the process. This includes making the process a priority
activity for all representatives, components, officials, and personnel
of the Department who need to be involved in the rulemaking, from the
time of initiation until such time as a final rule is issued or the
process is expressly terminated. The Department will provide
administrative support for the process and will take steps to ensure
that the negotiated rulemaking committee has the appropriate resources
it requires to complete its work in a timely fashion. These include the
provision or procurement of such support services as properly equipped
space adequate for public meetings and caucuses; logistical support;
word processing and distribution of background information; the
services of a convenor/facilitator; and such additional research and
other technical assistance as may be necessary.
To the extent possible, consistent with its legal obligations, the
Department currently plans to use any consensus arising from the
regulatory negotiation committee as the basis for the proposed minimum
standards to be published for public notice and comment.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The Department of Transportation is obligated under Section
7212 to propose and adopt minimum standards regardless of whether
the committee to be established pursuant to Section 7212 is able to
achieve consensus on all required elements of those standards. Thus,
if the committee were unable to reach consensus on any of the
elements, the Department of Transportation would, in consultation
with the Department of Homeland Security, independently develop
proposals regarding those elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Negotiating Consensus
As discussed above, the negotiated rulemaking process is
fundamentally different from the usual development process for
developing a proposed rule. Negotiation allows interested and affected
parties to discuss possible approaches to various issues rather than
simply being asked in a regular notice and comment rulemaking
proceeding to respond to details on a proposal developed and issued by
an agency. The negotiation process involves a mutual education of the
parties by each other on the practical concerns about the impact of
various approaches. Each committee member participates in resolving the
interests and concerns of other members, rather than leaving it up to
the agency to bridge different points of view.
A key principle of negotiated rulemaking is that agreement is by
consensus. Thus, no one interest or group of interests is able to
control the process. Under the NRA as noted above, ``consensus''
usually means the unanimous concurrence among interests represented on
a negotiated rulemaking committee, though a different definition may be
employed in some cases. In addition, experience has demonstrated that
using a professional mediator to facilitate this process will assist
all potential parties, including helping to identify their interests in
the rule and enabling them to reevaluate previously stated positions on
issues involved in the rulemaking effort.
D. Key Issues for Negotiation; Invitation to Comment on Issues To Be
Addressed
As noted above, Section 7212 sets forth considerable detail
regarding the issues to be addressed in developing and promulgating the
mandated minimum standards. The Department invites comment on the
issues regarding the particular aspects of the standards that the
negotiating committee should address in developing its recommendations
or report.
The Department is aware of the considerable work that has been and
is being done at Federal and State levels and in the private sector to
improve various types of identification documents, including driver's
licenses. We invite comment on which of these past and ongoing efforts
are most relevant to this rulemaking, and on what implications those
efforts have for the recommendations and choices to be made in this
rulemaking.
IV. Procedures and Guidelines for This Regulatory Negotiation
The following proposed procedures and guidelines will apply to the
regulatory negotiation process, subject to appropriate changes made as
a result of comments on this Notice or as determined to be necessary
during the negotiating process.
A. Notice of Intent To Establish Advisory Committee and Request for
Comment
In accordance with the requirements of FACA, an agency of the
Federal government cannot establish or utilize a group of people in the
interest of obtaining consensus advice or recommendations unless that
group is chartered as a Federal advisory committee. It is the purpose
of this Notice to indicate the Department's intent to create a Federal
advisory committee, to identify the issues involved in the rulemaking,
to identify the interests affected by the rulemaking, to identify
potential participants who will adequately represent those interests,
and to ask for comment on the identification of the issues, interests,
procedures, and participants.
B. Facilitator
Pursuant to the NRA (5 U.S.C. 566), a facilitator will be selected
to serve as an impartial chair of the meetings; assist committee
members to conduct discussions and negotiations; and manage the keeping
of minutes and records as required by FACA. The facilitator will chair
the negotiations, may offer alternative suggestions to committee
members to help achieve the desired consensus, will help participants
define and reach consensus, and will determine the feasibility of
negotiating particular issues. The Department has selected Ms. Susan
Podziba, an experienced mediator, as its convenor/facilitator for this
regulatory negotiation.
C. Membership
The NRA provides that the agency establishing the regulatory
negotiation advisory committee ``shall limit membership to 25 members,
unless the agency head determines that a greater number of members is
necessary for the functioning of the committee or to achieve balanced
membership.'' The purpose of the limit on membership is to promote
committee efficiency in deliberating and reaching decisions on
recommendations. The Department of Transportation's current inclination
is to observe that limit. However, the Department notes that its
experience with regulatory negotiations indicates that limiting
membership to fewer than 25 members is often desirable.
D. Interests Likely To Be Affected; Representation of Those Interests
The committee will include a representative from the Department of
Transportation and from the interests and organizations listed below.
Each representative may also name an alternate, who will be encouraged
to attend all committee meetings and will serve in place of the
representative if necessary. The DOT representative is the Designated
Federal Official (DFO and will participate in the deliberations and
activities of the committee with the same rights and responsibilities
as other committee members. The DFO will be authorized to fully
represent the Department in the discussions and negotiations of the
committee.
[[Page 8760]]
The Department has tentatively identified the following
organizations or interests to participate in the negotiated rulemaking.
The convenor will contact these and other organizations to determine
their interests and willingness to serve on the committee.
(1) Department of Transportation.
(2) Department of Homeland Security.
(3) State offices that issue driver's licenses or personal
identification cards; American Association of Motor Vehicle
Administrators.
(4) Representatives of elected State officials; National Governors
Association; National Conference of State Legislatures; National
Association of Attorneys General.
(5) Other interested parties.
(a) Groups or organizations presenting the interests of applicants
for and holders of driver's licenses and personal identification cards.
(i) Consumer organization.
(ii) Organization representing non-citizens/immigrants.
(b) Organizations with technological and operational expertise in
document security.
(c) Privacy and civil liberties groups.
(d) Law enforcement officials.
The first four interests identified above are required by the
statute to participate in the negotiated rulemaking.\12\ The ``other
interests'' mentioned are those that appear to the Department to have
potentially important roles in helping achieve consensus on
recommendations on the issues involved. The Department seeks comment on
whether there are additional interests that should be represented on
the committee. The Department also seeks comments on particular
organizations and individuals who would appropriately represent
interests on the committee. Please identify such organizations and
interests if they exist and explain why they should have separate
representation on the committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Section 7212(b)(4)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The list of potential parties specifically named above is not
presented as a complete or exclusive list from which committee members
will be selected, nor does inclusion on the list of potential parties
mean that a party on the list has agreed to participate as a member of
the committee or as a member of a coalition, or will necessarily be
invited to serve on the committee. The list merely indicates parties
that DOT has tentatively identified as representing significantly
affected interests in the outcome of the proposed rule. This document
gives notice of this process to other potential participants and
affords them the opportunity to request representation in the
negotiations. The procedure for requesting such representation is set
out below. In addition, comments and suggestions on this tentative list
are invited.
The Department is aware that there are many more potential
participants, whether they are listed here or not, than there are
membership slots on the committee. We do not believe, nor does the NRA
contemplate, that each potentially affected group must participate
directly in the negotiations. What is important is that each affected
interest be adequately represented. To have a successful negotiation,
it is important for interested parties to identify and form coalitions
that adequately represent significantly affected interests. These
coalitions, to provide adequate representation, must agree to support,
both financially and technically, a member to the committee whom they
will choose to represent their ``interest.'' Those selected, it should
be noted, represent one or more interests, not just themselves or their
organizations.
It is very important to recognize that interested parties who are
not selected to membership on the committee can make valuable
contributions to this negotiated rulemaking effort in any of several
ways:
The person or organization could request to be placed on
the committee mailing list, submitting written comments, as
appropriate;
Any member of the public could attend the committee
meetings, caucus with his or her interest's member on the committee,
and, as provided in FACA, speak to the committee. Time will be set
aside during each meeting for this purpose, consistent with the
committee's need for sufficient time to complete its deliberations; or
The person or organization could assist in the work of a
workgroup that might be established by the committee.
Informal workgroups are usually established by an advisory
committee to assist the committee in ``staffing'' various technical
matters (e.g., researching or preparing summaries of the technical
literature or comments on particular matters such as economic issues)
before the committee so as to facilitate committee deliberations. They
also might assist in estimating costs and drafting regulatory text on
issues associated with the analysis of the costs and benefits
addressed, and formulating drafts of the various provisions and their
justification previously developed by the committee. Given their
staffing function, workgroups usually consist of participants who have
expertise or particular interest in the technical matter(s) being
studied.
E. Applications for Membership
Each application for membership or nomination to the committee
should include:
(i) the name of the applicant or nominee and the interest(s) such
person would represent;
(ii) evidence that the applicant or nominee is authorized to
represent parties related to the interest(s) the person proposes to
represent; and
(iii) a written commitment that the applicant or nominee would
participate in good faith.
Please be aware that each individual or organization affected by a
final rule need not have its own representative on the committee.
Rather, each interest must be adequately represented, and the committee
should be fairly balanced.
F. Good Faith Negotiation
Committee members should be willing to negotiate in good faith and
have the authority from his or her constituency to do so. The first
step is to ensure that each member has good communications with his or
her constituencies. An intra-interest network of communication should
be established to bring information from the support organization to
the member at the table, and to take information from the table back to
the support organization. Second, each organization or coalition
should, therefore, designate as its representative an official with
credibility and authority to insure that needed information is provided
and decisions are made in a timely fashion. Negotiated rulemaking
efforts can require a very significant contribution of time by the
appointed members for the duration of the negotiation process. Other
qualities that are very helpful are negotiating experience and skills,
and sufficient technical knowledge to participate in substantive
negotiations.
Certain concepts are central to negotiating in good faith. One is
the willingness to bring all issues to the bargaining table in an
attempt to reach a consensus, instead of keeping key issues in reserve.
The second is a willingness to promote and protect the ability of the
committee to conduct its negotiations. Finally, good faith includes a
willingness to move away from the type of positions usually taken in a
more traditional rulemaking process, and instead explore openly with
other parties all ideas that may emerge from the discussions of the
committee.
[[Page 8761]]
G. Notice of Establishment
After evaluating comments received as a result of this Notice, the
Department will issue a notice announcing the establishment and
composition of the committee. After the committee is chartered, the
negotiations will begin.
H. Administrative Support and Meetings
Staff support will be provided by the Department. Meetings are
currently expected to take place in Washington, DC.
I. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
The committee's objective will be to prepare a report, consisting
of its consensus recommendations for the regulatory text of a draft
notice of proposed rulemaking. This report may also include suggestions
for the NPRM preamble, regulatory evaluation, or other supplemental
documents. If the committee cannot achieve consensus on some aspects of
the proposed regulatory text, it will, pursuant to the ``ground rules''
the committee has established, identify in its report those areas of
disagreement, and provide explanations for any disagreement. The
Department will use the information and recommendations from the
committee report to draft a notice of proposed rulemaking and, as
appropriate, supporting documents. Committee recommendations and other
documents produced by the committee will be placed in the rulemaking
docket.
In the event that the Department's NPRM differs from the
committee's consensus recommendations, the preamble to an NPRM
addressing the issues that were the subject of the negotiations will
explain the reasons for the decision to depart from the committee's
recommendations.
Following the issuance of NPRM and comment period, the Department
will prepare and provide to the committee a comment summary. The
committee will then be asked to determine whether the committee should
reconvene to discuss changes to the NPRM based on the comments.
J. Committee Procedures
Under the general guidance of the facilitator, and subject to legal
requirements, the committee will establish detailed procedures for the
meetings. The meetings of the committee will be open to the public. Any
person attending the committee meetings may address the committee if
time permits or file statements with the committee.
K. Record of Meetings
In accordance with FACA requirements, the facilitator will prepare
summaries of all committee meetings. These summaries will be placed in
the public docket for this rulemaking.
L. Tentative Schedule
The Department is seeking to convene the first of the committee's
meetings by the last week of March 2005. The date and exact location of
that meeting will be announced in the agency's notice of establishment
of the advisory committee. Meetings are expected to last approximately
three and a half days each. The negotiation process will proceed
according to a schedule of specific dates for subsequent meetings that
the committee devises at its first meeting. We will publish a single
notice of the schedule of all future meetings in the Federal Register,
but will amend the notice through subsequent Federal Register notices
if it becomes necessary to do so. The interval between meetings will be
approximately two weeks.
The first meeting will commence with an overview of the regulatory
negotiation process conducted by the facilitator.
Issued this 17th day of February, 2005, in Washington, DC.
Jeffrey A. Rosen,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 05-3458 Filed 2-17-05; 4:26 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P